FEB. 4, 1831.] Duty on Salt. [H. of R. that it is a war tax. This only goes to prove that the this country independent of foreign nations, and to ascercourse which I now advocate, should be adopted; that tain what measure of duty should be laid in subsequent lesuch gentlemen may obtain some information in relation gislation upon this subject. I consider it important to have to that matter, for they most certainly have not taken the the facts which I know, from a view of the report, it controuble to examine into the history of the salt duty of the tains. I cannot subscribe to the doctrine, that because an United States. The duty upon salt did not take its rise article is indispensable, and enters into the daily consumpduring the last war, but is coeval with the legislation of tion of every family, that for this reason the Government this Government. In 1789, a duty of six cents on each should give no encouragement to the American enterprise bushel was laid on foreign salt; this duty being considered that attempts to increase the article at home. It appears insufficient to protect the domestic manufacturer, in 1790 to me, the more essentially necessary an article is to the the duty was augmented to twelve cents on each bushel: people, the more care should be taken that a supply of in 1797, the duty was augmented to twenty cents upon the such article should always be had without being dependbushel of foreign salt, and has continued uniformly from ent upon foreign nations. Let us, said Mr. M., have the the year 1790 until the beginning of the last month, ex- report of the committee printed, that we may have inforcepting the space of seven years, during which time no mation upon this matter, and that any future legislation duty was collected upon foreign salt. I would suggest upon it may be done advisedly. to those that are disposed to give no encouragement to Mr. CHILTON, of Kentucky, without renewing his opthe domestic manufacturer, for the benefit of the people, position of yesterday to the bill, (which opposition producto look into the price which the people had to pay for ed the question of rejection,) and with a view to termisalt during the period in which no duty was collected; I nate a debate which must be useless, and with an underthink that they will find, from the accounts of the sales ac- standing that the subject should not be called up again at tually made, that people paid a higher price for their salt the present session of Congress, moved to lay the bill and during these seven years, than during any other seven report upon the table; but withdrew the motion at the reyears since the commencement of the Government until quest of the present time. In the year 1813, an act passed fixing Mr. MCCREERY, of Pennsylvania, who briefly stated the duty upon foreign salt at twenty cents, which expired the reasons why, though he had been uniformly opposed under a limitation contained within itself. The tax, laid to the reduction of the duty upon salt, he should vote to by this act, may be called a war tax. But, in 1816, an act get rid of the bill, either by rejection or by laying it upon passed continuing the duty at twenty cents. Was the duty the table. He believed that the discussion of the bill laid upon foreign salt in 1789, 1790, 1797, and 1816, war would be a useless consumption of time, because there taxes? It may be said that the tax of 1816 was to enable was no probability of arriving at a decision in its favor at the Government to discharge the public debt that accrued the present session. There remained now but about in consequence of the war; that, in addition to the encou- twenty-three business days of the session, and a vast numragement of the domestic manufacturer of the article, Iber of bills (some of them important) yet remain to be actbelieve, was the cause of the act of 1816. Those who sup-ed upon. pose that the duty upon salt is a war tax, will certainly Mr. THOMPSON, of Georgia, objected to any course, agree to vote against the motion to reject the bill, with a with regard to this bill, which should leave it open as a view that it may be laid upon the table, and the report subject for consideration. The House had been assured printed, in order that they may obtain more correct infor- by the gentleman from Virginia, as it had been yesterday mation in relation to the salt duty. All I wish, said Mr. assured by the chairman of the Committee on Manufactures, M., is information upon this interesting and very exciting that he did not wish any legislation upon the subject at the subject. The amount of capital vested in the manufac-present session. Why, then, Mr. T. asked, was the subture of salt in the United States, is not less than seven mil-ject introduced here at all? For what purpose? It is cerlions of dollars, which, together with the difficulty expe- tainly not to waste the small remnant of time yet hanging rienced by the people of this country during the last war, on our hands, said he, when all sides of the House seem in obtaining the article, ought to admonish every one of disposed to husband it. It must be to give a moral effect the importance of having full information upon the sub-to the proposition in the bill; to have the report printed ject, and of the propriety of legislating cautiously, lest the and spread over the country-and for what purpose? manufacturer of American salt be injured, and, in case of Why, sir, to force upon us, if they can, an increase of this war with a foreign nation, the same consequences result duty. He regretted to hear of the motion to lay the bill that have heretofore taken place. on the table; because an agreement to a proposition of Some gentlemen think information upon this subject is that sort would give something of character to the geneunnecessary, because all encouragement to American in- ral proposition of the Committee on Manufactures. In dustry and domestic manufactures is inexpedient and the sincerity of his heart, he said, he wished this proposiunconstitutional. The early history of the legislation of tion to pass off without being the cause of an increase of this country shows à different view of this matter. The the present excitement in the Southern country. If genopinion of General Washington in 1796--the opinion of tlemen are disposed to force the measure upon us, howMr. Jefferson in 1808 and 1816--the opinion of Mr. Ma- ever, said Mr. T., let them do it at once-bring up the dison in 1809 and 1815--the opinion of Mr. Monroe in question, and decide upon it. If the Committee on Manu1821 and 1823-and the opinion of the present Chief Ma- factures do not think proper to withdraw the proposition, gistrate, in his last message, show that to encourage the let the bill go on without delay to a final decision. I obdomestic manufacturer of such articles as are essential to ject to the second reading. the independence and prosperity of the country, and es- Mr. HAYNES, of Georgia, said, if he believed that the pecially those which are indispensable in time of war, is present discussion of this bill would lead to a further reboth expedient and constitutional. Can any be more es-duction of the duty on salt, he should not object to it: but, sential in peace or war than salt? Is it not as necessary believing that the consideration of the bill now would lead that the soldier should have his salt and rations, as a coat to nothing but a further consumption of tie in debate, and musket? I have no disposition to go into an argument he moved the previous question. upon the question whether the duty upon salt should be augmented or diminished. I have only to say, that I believe a reasonable degree of encouragement should be given the manufacturers of salt by the Government, to enable them to stand against foreign competition, to render VOL. VII.-39 The motion for the previous question was not seconded by a majority, the yeas being 78, the nays 90. Mr. STERIGERE, of Pennsylvania, then moved to lay the bill on the table. The motion was declared not to be now in order, the Duly on Salt. question of rejection having been renewed by Mr. THOмPSON's objection to the second reading of the bill. [FEB. 4, 1831. Mr. WILDE, of Georgia, made a few observations of this House, he thought it better that it should do at against the postponement. Whatever was the disposition once what it is disposed to do ultimately. Mr. BLAIR, of South Carolina, said he hoped the bill reported by the Committee on Manufactures for repealing the act passed at the last session, reducing the duty on salt, would neither be laid on the table, nor favorably en-mind of the gentleman from Georgia, altogether erroneous. Mr. MALLARY rose to correct an impression on the tertained by the House in any shape whatever. great excitement of the South, and particularly of that Manufactures, to repeal the law of last session. Ile enThe There was no intention, on the part of the Committee on State which he had the honor, in part, to represent, was tered into a statement of the views of that committee, to well known to Congress and to the American people. The show the motives that had actuated them in reporting the popular indignation in South Carolina against what he and present bill, and left it to the House to take such order the people of that State considered the iniquitous and un-on the subject as they might deem proper. constitutional legislation of Congress, (especially in relation to the tariff,) was almost universal; and it was with members of the House with whom I have had the honor Mr. NUCKOLLS said: It will be recollected, by those difficulty they had been restrained from adopting mea-of serving on this floor for the last four years, that I have sures for their own relief, and for the redress of their own rarely trespassed on their patience, nor would I do so wrongs-much pains had to be taken to defeat the call of now, but for the strong feeling and deep interest which a convention. To what results such measures would have my constituents, in common with myself, have on this led, he would not now inquire, even if it were possible to subject. And here, sir, permit me to remark, that I difascertain them; they were at least alarming, and the con- fer, widely differ, from my political friends of the South, templation of them disagreeable. And, after what had in the course they pursue in relation to this bill. They been done here at the close of the last session, he had seem inclined to avoid discussion, by rejecting this bill on thought the call of a convention, or any action whatever, its second reading-before it has undergone that consideron the part of South Carolina, unnecessary, premature, ation its importance demands, and even before the acand hazardous. He had, therefore, discouraged every companying report has been printed for our examination. thing of this kind. He had opposed the call of a conven- Sir, this is too nearly allied to the practice which has tion, and he believed his colleagues would bear him out in sprung up in this hall within the last three years, to meet the assertion, that he had contributed very much to the my approbation. What is that practice? Why, sir, to defeat of that measure. He claimed no merit for this; refuse even the courtesy of a consideration to many of and believed he would not subject himself to any imputa- the most interesting topics introduced here by the retion of vanity in making the declaration, because, if the presentatives of the people. I had been taught (before present proposition succeeded, he should regret the ad- my acquaintance with it) that this was a deliberative asvice he had given to his constituents during the last sum-sembly, organized by the people, to hear, consider, dismer and fall. He had told the people at home that things cuss, and decide upon all questions affecting their intehere were rapidly changing for the better. Among many rests, or involving their liberty. But, sir, is this true? Are other evidences of this change, he had adverted, both we thus mindful of the rights of the people, and of the verbally, and in the newspapers, to the reduction of the respect due to those whom they send here? It is a notoduty on salt. But if, instead of advancing still further to rious fact, that there is an organized majority in this House, correct the evils of which the South complains-if, instead whose settled practice it is to scout from these walls every of going on with the reformation of the tariff system, we proposition looking to a modification of the restrictive recede, and undo the little we have already done, he system; thereby virtually refusing, to a large portion of should be ashamed to meet his constituents. with pain and contrition, have to acknowledge that, with to public view the grievances under which they labor. He should, the American people, the constitutional right of exposing the best intentions, he had given them, perhaps, wrong advice; that he had been deceived himself; and had, in- being proscriptive in principle, disrespectful to the AmeSir, I have uniformly opposed every thing of this sort as nocently, held out to them delusive hopes and fallacious rican people, and unbecoming the dignity of this House. expectations. He, however, was not disposed to argue I am not afraid to submit any question to their candid and the matter at this time. He took it for granted the House impartial judgment, when it shall have been fully and would reject this bill by an overwhelming majority. He, deliberately set before them by the debates in this assemtherefore, hoped argument against it was unnecessary. bly, and am therefore none the less opposed to refusing Besides, his feelings, in relation to this subject, were too this bill a second reading, because I am against its princistrong to authorize him to run the hazard (at this moment) ples and its objects. I am for giving every question a fair of saying what might be regarded as indecorous. dor, however, required, and an imperative duty to his Can-hearing, whether for or against me. constituents, to himself, and to the House, enjoined it I represent, and those of the entire State from which I Mr. Speaker, the part I have borne among the people upon him to declare that, if this proposition should suc- come, has been similar to that of my colleague, [Mr. ceed, the time for argument will have passed away. Mr. HUNTINGTON, of Connecticut, said that the only lay the fervid excitement which prevailed on my return BLAIR,] who last addressed us. wish of the Committee on Manufactures, he believed, was among them. They had seen and felt, with the sensibility Like him, I sought to althat this subject should be placed in a situation to be ex-of enlightened freemen, that their rights were invaded by amined with a view to future consideration. the committee had taken no extraordinary course, but had to hear their representatives. Sir, I felt in my own boTo do this, unjust taxation, and themselves insulted by your refusal presented a report stating their views of it, accompanied som that there was ample provocation for all this. But, by a bill. If, without examining either the memorial of like themselves, I was devoted to the Union, and its harthe manufacturers, or the report of the committee, the monious preservation. House should decide to reject the bill, it would certainly bearance, and a reliance on the justice of their Northern I exhorted to moderation, forbe an unusual proceeding, to say the least of it. hoped, therefore, that the motion for rejection would not the tariff at the close of the last session, as affording eviHe and Western brethren. I alluded to the modifications of prevail. With a view to enable the House to look into dence of that justice. But, sir, respect for their intellithis memorial from a most respectable class of men large-gence, and my own self-respect, would not permit me to ly engaged in the manufacture of salt, and to peruse the disguise the fact, that all those modifications, except that report, he moved to postpone the further consideration of of the salt duty, were but adding to the effective strength the bill to this day two weeks. and fixed character of the system of which they complain FEB. 4, 1831.] James Monroe.-Susan Decatur. [H. OF R. ed. Well, sir, what was the result? Our people are and nothing is too sacred for their examination. I thereeven now looking, with anxious expectation, to this body fore entreat the House, and particularly the Southern for the realization of these predictions. When, therefore, portion, to withdraw all objection to the second reading, the bill introduced yesterday by the honorable chairman and to abstain from using this illiberal weapon of defence, [Mr. MALLARY] was presented, I dissented from the views by which they have so often been unkindly scourged. of my honorable colleagues, [Mr. BLAIR and Mr. Tuck- We shall then see whether, instead of the duty going ER,] and others, in this, that, whilst they desired to sup. down to ten cents, as provided by the law of 1830, it be press the discussion of this question, with the view of fixed at fifteen, and thereby an earnest given that we are avoiding the excitement growing out of it, I am decidedly to expect still further imposition. Should such be the in favor of playing out the game-of meeting the question case, I can but fear that, in the future history of this fully and boldly-of discussing it calmly and deliberately, country, and in its influence on the harmony and perand ascertaining whether my assurances to my constitu- petuity of our Union, the sum of five cents on salt may be ents are to be realized. I trust, therefore, that the gen-equally important with three cents on tea. tleman from Georgia [Mr. THOMPSON] will withdraw his When Mr. NuCKOLLS Concluded, the SPEAKER anopposition to the second reading of this bill. Let the nounced that the allotted hour had expired. report and bill be referred and printed, and, after time for Mr. CARSON, of North Carolina, moved to suspend examination, let them come up for discussion. Sir, I will the rule, that the consideration of the subject might go vote at any time for taking up and deciding the fate of on; but the House refused to suspend the rule. this matter. The people of South Carolina are in great doubt and perplexity on this subject; they have been assured that relief from their unconstitutional burdens would be progressive; but if, on the contrary, our course is to be retroactive, by increasing instead of diminishing their grievances, we desire to know it, in order that we may set about relieving ourselves from them, "peaceably, if we can; forcibly, if we must." JAMES MONROE. The bill for the relief of James Monroe was read the third time; and the question being, "Shall it pass?” Mr. CHILTON called for the yeas and nays on the question, and they were ordered by the House. Being taken, they stood as follows: YEAS.--Messrs. Arnold, Bailey, J. S. Barbour, BartThe excessive duty heretofore levied on foreign salt ley, Bates, Beekman, Bell, Brown, Buchanan, Butman, constitutes, in the domestic manufacturer, the most odious Cambreleng, Campbell, Childs, Coleman, Condict, Conand unjustifiable monopoly we have ever been called on ner, Coulter, Crockett, Creighton, Crocheron, Crowninto endure. It is an article necessary to the consumption shield, Davenport, John Davis, Deberry, Denny, De of every living creature-the poor as well as the rich are Witt, Dickinson, Doddridge, Duncan, Dwight, Éager, compelled to have it or perish; and yet a few wealthy ma- Earll, George Evans, Joshua Evans, Edward Everett, Honufacturers of it are protected in making it, by a duty of race Everett, Finch, Forward, Gilmore, Gordon, Green, two or three hundred per cent., collected chiefly from the Grennell, Gurley, Hawkins, Hemphill, Hinds, Hodges, poor. The average cost of imported salt does not ex- Holland, Howard, Hughes, Ingersoll, Thomas Irwin, Wilceed nine cents the bushel, and I am informed by an ho- liam W. Irvin, Jarvis, Johns, Richard M. Johnson, Kennorable gentleman from Virginia, coming from a salt dis-non, Lent, Mallary, Martindale, Martin, McCreery, Mctrict, that it can be made there for eight cents. On what Duffie, Mercer, Miller, Mitchell, Monell, Norton, Nuckprinciple, then, is it, that we are to pay a tax so dispro- olls, Overton, Pearce, Pettis, Ramscy, Randolph, Reed, portioned to the original cost? Sir, I have learned, from high authority, that the manufacturers of salt, where it does not cost more than eight to ten cents to make it, have been known to sell it, at their own doors, at from seventy-five to one hundred cents per bushel; and that, as they proceeded into the surrounding country, the price was increased to from one dollar and twenty-five cents to one dollar and fifty cents, until their article began to meet the competition of foreign salt; and then they would reduce the price in proportion to the competition, until they came down to sixty cents, and this, too, after carrying it more than one hundred miles. But it is not my intention now to go into the general question; this will be more appropriate when the subject shall come up, after the bill and report shall have been referred and printed, and until then I dismiss it. Rencher, Richardson, Rose, Russel, Scott, William B. NAYS.--Messrs. Alexander, Allen, Alston, Anderson, Angel, Archer, Armstrong, Noyes Barber, Barnwell, Barringer, James Blair, John Blair, Bockee, Boon, Borst, Bouldin, Brodhead, Cahoon, Chandler, Chilton, Claiborne, Clay, Clark, Coke, Cooper, Cowles, Craig, Crane, Crawford, Warren R. Davis, Desha, Draper, Drayton, Ellsworth, Findlay, Foster, Fry, Gaither, Hall, Halsey, Harvey, Haynes, Hoffman, Hubbard, Hunt, Huntington, Ihrie, Isacks, Cave Johnson, Kincaid, Perkins King, Adam King, Lamar, Lea, Leavitt, Lecompte, Letcher, Mr. Speaker, an honorable gentleman from Virginia, Lewis, Loyall, Lumpkin, Lyon, Magee, Marr, Thomas [Mr. DODRIDGE,] in opposing the other day the second Maxwell, Lewis Maxwell, McCoy, McIntire, Muhlenberg, reading of a bill introduced by my friend and colleague, Pierson, Polk, Potter, Roane, Sanford, Aug. H. Shep[Mr. Davis,] to repeal the 25th section of the judiciary perd, William L. Storrs, Swann, Swift, Wiley Thompact, said he regarded the bill as being equally import- son, John Thomson, Trezvant, Tucker, Vance, Vinton, ant, as a proposition to repeal the Union, and therefore Weeks, Whittlesey, Williams, Yance.-83. he could not consent to its second reading. Sir, I will So the bill was passed. not say that the bill presented yesterday by the gentle-1 On motion of Mr. MARTIN, the title of the bill was man from Vermont [Mr. MALLARY] is equivalent to a amended to read as follows: "A bill to provide for the proposition to repeal the Union-but when we consider final settlement and adjustment of the various claims prethe strong excitement and deep sense of unconstitutional ferred by James Monroe against the United States." oppression which pervades the entire South, and take The bill from the Senate for the relief of William Smith, in connexion with it the effort, on the part of the gentle-administrator of John Taylor, deceased, was read the third man, [Mr. MALLARY,] to extend that oppression, it is time, and passed. something very like it. But, differing from the gentleman from Virginia as to the proper course on such trying occasions, I desire to meet and to look it in the face. Sir, the people speak through representatives on this floor, SUSAN DECATUR. Mr. McDUFFIE submitted a motion that the House do now take up the bill to compensate Susan Decatur, widow H. OF R.] Judge Peck's Trial.—The Salt Duty. and legal representative of Captain Stephen Decatur, deceased, et al. Mr. WILLIAMS said that this was as good a time as any other to try the question whether the House meant to consider the bill at the present session, and he therefore called for the yeas and nays on the question of consideration. They were ordered by the House, and, being taken, stood--yeas 85, nays 100. So the House refused to consider the bill. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 5. [FEB. 5, 1831. He, therefore, with a view of meeting this question of order, moved that the bill do lie on the table. The SPEAKER pronounced this motion not to be in order; whereupon, Mr. SUTHERLAND appealed from this decision. In support of his course, Mr. S. observed, that he meant no disrespect to the Chair, but that he was desirous of knowing whether the decisions made upon motions last year, which were parallel with the present motion, were to be overruled by the Chair. If they were to be set aside, he was anxious that the House should have notice of the fact, and, at the opening of the next session of Mr. HUNT, from the Committee on the Public Lands, Congress, we might have the point stated at the back of to which was recommitted the bill to authorize the State the journals, where all matters of order are recorded. of Missouri to sell the lands reserved for the use of schools, For if the subject was not disturbed in the way he sug a seminary of learning, and salt springs, in that State, re-gested, and some opinion obtained from the Chair, the ported an amendatory bill; which was twice read; and practice of the first session of this Congress would appear the question being put on engrossing the bill for a third from the journals to contradict that of the second session. reading, Mr. S. then proceeded to show that it had been decided Mr. RICHARDSON observed, that, on hearing the bill by the Speaker, during the last year, that the motion to read, he perceived that it contained a provision to which lie on the table took precedence of the question "Shall he could not consent; but the subject presenting itself the bill be rejected?" and cited two or three parallel suddenly, he was not prepared at this moment to suggest cases from the journals of the last session, which he read a remedy. The bill provided that if the proceeds of these and commented on to show their similarity to the present lands should prove insufficient for the permanent maintecase. When Mr. S. had concluded, nance and support of schools throughout the State, no part of it could ever be applied. Should this prove to be the case, said Mr. R., and the fund prove inadequate to the entire support, the whole object would be defeated, and, of course, generations would die in ignorance. This Mr. R. could not consent to; and to allow himself time to prepare an amendment to the section, he moved to postpone the bill till Monday-which was agreed to. The SPEAKER rose, and, after admitting that the present decision of the Chair was at variance with the decisions of the last session, which had been cited, proceeded to explain to the House his reasons for the change. It was, he said, after mature reflection on the former practice, and after much consultation with those better qualified than himself to form a correct judgment on the question, that he had come to the conclusion that the former decisions were erroneous; and, being so convinced, his duty Mr. WICKLIFFE, from the Committee on the Public Lands, reported a bill explanatory of an act for the relief to the high and responsible trust reposed in him by the of the officers and soldiers of the Virginia line and navy and of the continental army, during the revolutionary war, approved the 30th May, 1830; which was twice read. House, did not permit any fear of apparent inconsistency to prevent his following the dictates of his better judg ment. The honorable SPEAKER then went into an examiMr. W. said it was of importance that the bill should nation and exposition of the rules of order and the nature be speedily passed. If, however, any gentleman had ob- of the questions before the House, to show why the jections to its passage at this time, he was willing to con- former practice was erroneous, and the present decision sent to its postponement for a short time, to allow of an compatible with the spirit of the rules, with their true opportunity to examine its provisions. Mr. W. then ex-application to the question, and with the reason of the plained the object of the bill; when the further consideracase. When the SPEAKER took his seat, tion of it was postponed to Wednesday next. JUDGE PECK'S TRIAL. Mr.SUTHERLAND again rose, and observed, a greater man than either of us on parliamentary practice [meaning, it is presumed, Mr. Hatsell,] has said, "it is much more Mr. MAXWELL, of New York, from the Committee material that there should be a rule to go by, than what on Accounts, made a report on the memorial of the wit-that rule is;" and I think upon that ground alone the old nesses in the case of Judge Peck, attending here during practice might well be sustained. As to the reasons the last session, accompanied by the following resolution: addressed to the House by the SPEAKER, with all due "Resolved, That the Clerk of this House be authorized deference to the Chair, Mr. S. thought he could readily to pay to the witnesses who attended before the Com-answer them; but as Mr. Speaker had thought proper to mittee on the Judiciary in the case of Judge Peck, at the change his opinion on the subject, he felt no disposition last session, the same compensation for their attendance to urge the appeal any further, and therefore withdrew it. and mileage, respectively, as has been allowed to the witnesses who have attended the trial of the impeachment at the present session, deducting therefrom the amount allowed to them at the last session. The resolution was agreed to. THE SALT DUTY. Mr. THOMPSON then said, that, in accordance with the wishes of several of his friends, he would withdraw his objection, and let the bill proceed to a second reading. The bill was accordingly read the second time. Mr. WILLIAMS then moved that the bill do lie on the table, and the motion was decided in the affirmative by the The House resumed the consideration of the bill to re-following vote: store the duty on imported salt--the question being on the rejection of the bill- Mr. SUTHERLAND rose, and said that one or two of his colleagues had, in the course of the debate upon this bill, moved that the bill be laid upon the table; and having observed that the Speaker refused the motion, declaring it to be out of order, pending an objection to the second reading, he took leave to say that he respectfully apprehended that, from the recorded decisions of the House, the motion ought to be entertained by the Chair. [Mr. BLAIR, of South Carolina, had first voted in the negative; after all the names had been called, he observed that, as it seemed now to be the understanding that the bill should be laid on the table, not to be taken up again during the session, he would change his former vote on the question, and now vote for the motion.] YEAS. Messrs. Anderson, Archer, Armstrong, Bailey, N. Barber, J. S. Barbour, Barringer, Bartley, Bates, Baylor, Beekman, Bell, James Blair, John Blair, Bockee, Borst, Brodhead. Brown, Butman, Cahoon, Cambreleng, FEB. 7, 1831.] Books for the use of Members.--Salt Reserves in Illinois.-Indian Affairs. SALT RESERVES IN ILLINOIS. [H. or R. Mr. DRAYTON opposed the passage of the bill. Carson, Chandler, Chilton, Claiborne, Clay, Clark, Con-joyed the benefit of the work, and it was procured with- BOOKS FOR THE USE OF MEMBERS. Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, submitted the following resolution: Mr. WICKLIFFE said the bill had undergone a thorough examination by the Committee on the Public Lands, and that committee was unanimous in the opinion that the bill should pass. After some further conversation between Messrs. DRAYTON, IRVIN, of Ohio, WICKLIFFE, DUNCAN, and PETTIS, the question was put on the passage of the bill, and decided in the affirmative. The bill for the relief of Joseph H. Webb, coming up on its passage, it was opposed by Messrs. WILLIAMS, BATES, DRAYTON, and CRAIG; and was supported by Messrs. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, WHITTLESEY, DUNCAN, and CONNER. Resolved, That the Clerk of the House of Representatives be directed to procure two hundred and sixteen copies of the debates of the State conventions on the adoption of the federal constitution in 1787, one copy of which to be delivered to each member; and that the [The bill provided for an increase of the pension of the Clerk be directed, also, to have preserved for each mem- petitioner, on account of increasing disability from a ber an extra copy of the reports of Congress, at each wound he received from an Indian, while carrying the session, and to have the same bound in a strong, cheap, mail through the Indian country. It was opposed, on the ordinary binding, to embrace the present session, and to ground that Congress had no right to pension other than continue in future. those who were wounded in the military or naval service. In support of the resolution, Mr. JOHNSON said that, Mr. CONNER, to show that Congress had passed a bill when he had the honor of a seat in the other House, he allowing a pension in a similar case, read the law, which had been provided with the reports of this House, and granted a pension to the widow and representatives of that they were of value to him. He had an opportunity John Heap, who was killed by mail robbers, while in the to read them in the recess, and they therefore became of act of carrying the mail.] equal value to his constituents. They would be found of vast importance to members generally. With regard to the other portion of his resolution, it provided for the purchase of a work of great importance to members, in the discharge of their public duties. The other House had passed a resolution, by which each member of it had been furnished with a copy of that valuable | work, and he hoped that the members of this House would also be put in possession of it. Mr. CHILTON would not consume the time of the House in debating the resolution; but would content himself with calling for the yeas and nays on its adoption. The question being put on the passage of the bill, it was rejected by a vote of 50 to 72. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7. INDIAN AFFAIRS. Mr. EVERETT, of Massachusetts, presented a memorial of inhabitants of the town of Southampton, in the county of Hampshire, and State of Massachusetts, praying that the act of the last session of Congress, providing for an exchange of lands with certain Indian tribes, and for their removal and permanent settlement west of the MisMr. INGERSOLL asked for a division of the question. sissippi, may be repealed; that treaties made with the InMr. CAMBRELENG said the resolution was one of an dians, heretofore, may be inviolably observed; and that obnoxious character. If the House was disposed to sanc- the said Indians may be protected in the enjoyment of tion the measure at all, it should be done by law. Reso- their lands, and in all the rights secured to them by engagelutions of a similar character had, at the present session, ments entered into between the said Indians and the Unitbeen referred to the Committee on the Library, and he ed States. Mr. E. observed, that he had long felt it to hoped this would take the same direction. be the duty of the House to consider the all-important subMr. JOHNSON said a law was not necessary in this ject of this memorial. He should, himself, by way of resolucase-it had not been the custom or practice heretofore, tion, have called the attention of the House to the subject, and he saw no necessity for it now. The Senate had en-had no other member expressed an intention of doing so, |