Page images


FEBRUARY 18, 1862.

I HAVE voted against the proposition to lay this motion on the table, and I shall vote for the printing of this communication. I am influenced by considerations of respect and courtesy toward the distinguished personage from whom it proceeds. But I am influenced more by a consideration of the self-respect which I think the Senate owes to itself. The Congress of the United States, at a time interesting to the friends of liberty and free government throughout the world, sent a national ship to bring this personage from Europe to our shores. On his arrival here, the Congress of the United States, in the name and in behalf of the American people, bade him welcome to the capital. He came here, and was received by Congress. Upon his departing, he addressed to the Congress a respectful note through the President of the United States; but formalities of etiquette prevented the President from sending it to Congress, and it is now respectfully submitted by the gentleman himself. It seems to me that a refusal to receive it can do no injury to him, but may impair our own dignity. It is but courteous, under all the circumstances, to give a respectful conge to our guest. Congress having received this person as a guest, it appears to me, only acquits herself of an ordinary act of hospitality by receiving this parting communication. Under these circumstances, without at all referring to the contents of the paper, or to the manner of the paper, I think it is our duty to receive it. I see nothing objectionable in the communication; but if there was, courtesy, under all the circumstances, would seem to make it our duty to receive it, however objectionable it might be.

* Remarks on printing the farewell letter of Louis Kossuth.


MARCH 27, 185 2.

I FIND that this bill proposes nothing more than to remit duties upon a European donation to an American charity. The articles charged are the gift of Europeans for a benevolent and charitable purpose. I do not think it becomes the United States to tax the contributions of foreigners to our own charities, and therefore I am free to say that I shall vote for this bill; and under similar circumstances, I should vote for any other and similar bill. · We all recollect very well that a few years ago articles of great value were sent as a present to the United States. They became subject to duties; and, although these articles were of great cost and usefulness, they were actually sold under the hammer at the customhouse to pay the duties imposed upon them, and they went into the hands of strangers. I hope that we shall always be willing to remit the duties upon such donations. Such charities are not frequent and large enough to impoverish the treasury.


APRIL 3, 1852.

I do not know that, after due consideration, I shall have any objection to the passage of this resolution. I can only say, that, so far as my own views are concerned now, I am not prepared to vote for it to-day. The subject is new here; and I think there is a possibility that some injury may be done to the public interest by passing such a resolution hastily, while no possible evil can result from letting it lie over a few days—at least, for a day or two.

* Remarks on remitting duties on vestments imported by the Carmelite Convent at Baltimore.

+ Remarks on a resolution inquiring of the Secretary of the Navy, the object of the naval expedition to Japan.

The honorable Senator from Michigan has said very justly, that he could conceive it very proper that there should be such an expedition to Japan. There might be many reasons I think I could imagine very many reasons—which might well exist, why such an expedition might be very proper, which reasons it might be very proper for the Congress of the United States to understand, and yet which reasons it might not be very wise for the government of the United States to communicate to the world at the very moment of the transaction. When I look at the position in which we stand in relation to the Pacific and the East, and consider that we have advanced our posts to the coast of the Pacific Ocean ; that the trade of the East is in the hands of Euro

2 pean powers, who have been for two hundred years engaged by commercial treaties, by naval expeditions, and by armed power, in securing and parceling out the vast trade of the East among themselves; and that one nation alone has a monopoly of the trade of Japan, I think that, instead of inquiring why an expedition is now ordered by the government of the United States to Japan, the question naturally arises, Why have not the United States before sent an expedition to the East? But, as I said, I am not prepared to vote for the resolution to-day. I may be to-morrow; and I would respectfully suggest to the honorable mover that, as I find many others are in the same situation as myself, it would be probably wise to let the resolution lie over.


APRIL 6, 1852.

I Am instructed by the Legislature of the state of New York to submit certain joint resolutions. I ask that they may be read.

They are in favor of an appropriation for the construction of a ship canal around the Falls of the St. Ste. Marie.

In submitting these resolutions, I desire leave to say that I am proud of the catholic spirit and patriotism which inspired them; that I shall conform myself to the wishes of the Legislature of New York; and that I shall co-operate with the representatives of Michigan, and all others who may take an interest in the matter, with alacrity and perseverance in securing the earliest possible achievement of so great and truly national a work as a canal around the Falls of St. Ste. Marie. I move that the resolutions be laid on the table and printed.


APRIL 5, 1852.

I was inclined at first to look with disfavor upon the proposition to amend this bill so as to allow California a second representative; but upon examining the report of the committee, my mind has gone to the other conclusion. I will state the principal facts and considerations which seem to me to control the question. That California is entitled, like every other state in the Union, to representation in proportion to her population, is what no one will deny; that it is the office and duty of the government of the United States to ascertain the representative population, is equally unquestionable. They have undertaken to do so; and while that duty was being performed, California necessarily was passive. The census has been taken ; it is a nominal compliance with the requisition of the Constitution. It is not a full compliance, if the census is radically wrong, erroneous, and false. In that case there is no census of California. To make that point clear, I have only to suppose the case, that in the reports of the census there might be such an omission, by some merely arithmetical error, as to reduce the population of California from 117,000 to 10,000, or 12,000. Surely, there would then be no census of California.

The next consideration, then, is, whether there is such a radical and great error in the census in regard to California as to vitiate the returns as a census? I think that is apparent prima facie. We are told that the census of California, with all the corrections of a majority of the committee, fix the population of that state


* Remarks on granting an additional member to California on account of an error in

the census returns.

at the sum of 117,821 soulsmen, women, and children, of all classes and conditions. Well, I might say that we, historically,

, know that this result cannot be true. The state of California has paid, in duties, into the treasury, during the last year, $3,000,000. There are no 117,000 persons in the United States, promiscuously collected together, who

pay any

such sum of revenue. The population of California export five millions of gold monthly, that is, sixty millions a year. There are no one hundred and seventeen thousand people on the face of the earth, with all the facilities to be obtained, who can procure from the earth, prepare, exchange, and send abroad, sixty millions of bullion per annum. It is apparent, then, that there is a radical defect in the census, and that it is not merely incorrect, but that it is so vicious that it is no census at all.

Now, what appears prima facie is corroborated by testimony which has been taken by the committee. It derives strong support from the circumstance, that when this question became very material on the admission of California, the population of the state was then estimated at one hundred and seven thousand. Since that time, there has been a lapse of eighteen months, I think -nearly two years—with a continual increase of population, as proved, not merely by emigration to the state, but by the consumption of merchandise, by the duties paid, and by the rapidly augmenting exports of productions. It is testified to by the representatives of the state.

Well, then, it being clear that we have a vicious census, the question is, whether we have the materials by which we can correct it? Upon that point my mind has wavered most; it is, whether the evidence we have is sufficient to enable us to say, that the population is now two hundred thousand in fact, instead of one hundred and seventeen thousand, as it is put by the census. Nevertheless, it seems to me we have what, under all the circumstances, ought to be satisfactory to us; that is, the action of the legislature of California. That legislature had the responsibility of apportioning the representation in the legislature, and the taxes among the people of the state, and among the different counties and districts of the state; that is to say, they have had to perform precisely the same duty we have had, for a different object, for a different purpose. They have had to ascertain precisely the same fact, with no motive, that we can conceive, to mislead them

« PreviousContinue »