the sinking-fund, to apply the surplus of any year to the purchase of the three per centum stock particularly, but leaves them at liberty "to apply such surplus to the purchase of any portion of the public debt at such rates as, in their opinion, may be advantageous to the United States." This vests a discretionary authority, to be exercised under official responsibility. And if any Secretary of the Treasury, when he had the option of purchasing a portion of the debt, bearing a higher rate of interest at par or about par, were to execute the act by purchasing the three per centums at their present price, he would merit impeachment. Undoubtedly a state of fact may exist, such as there being no public debt remaining to be paid but the three per centum stock, with a surplus in the Treasury, idle and unproductive, in which it might be expedient to apply that surplus to the reimbursement of the three per centums. But while the interest of money is at a greater rate than three per centum, it would not, I think, be wise to produce an accumulation of public treasure for such a purpose. The postponement of any reduction of the amount of the revenue at this session must, however, give rise to that very accumulation; and it is, therefore, that I can not perceive the utility of the postponement.

We are told by the gentleman from Maryland, that offers have been made to the Secretary of the Treasury to exchange three per centums, at their market price of ninety-six per centum, for the bank stock of the government at his market price, which is about one hundred and twenty-six, and he thinks it would be wise to accept them. If the charter of the bank is renewed that stock will be probably worth much more than its present price; if not renewed, much less. Would it be fair in government, while the question is pending and undecided, to make such an exchange? The difference in value between a stock bearing three per centum and one bearing seven per centum must be really much greater than the difference between ninety-six and one hundred and twenty-six per centum. Supposing them to be perpetual annuities, the one would be worth more than twice the value of the other. But my objection to the treasury plan is, that it is not necessary to execute it-to continue these duties as the secretary proposes. The secretary has a debt of twenty-four millions to pay; he has from the accruing receipts of this year fourteen millions, and we are now told by the senator from Maryland, that this sum of fourteen millions is exclusive of any of the duties accruing this year. He proposes to raise eight millions by the sale of the bank stock, and to anticipate from the revenue receivable next year, two millions more. These three items, then, of fourteen millions, eight millions, and two millions, make up the sum required, of twenty-four millions, without the aid of the duties to which the resolution relates.

The gentleman from Maryland insists that the general government has been liberal toward the West in its appropriations of public lands for internal improvements; and, as to fortifications, he contends that the expenditures near the mouth of the Mississippi are for its especial benefit.

The appropriations of land to the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Alabama, have been liberal; hut it is not to be overlooked, that the general government is itself the greatest proprietor of land, and that a tendency of the improvements, v.hich these appropriations were to effect, is to increase the value of the unsold public domain. The erection of the fortifications for the defense of Louisiana was highly proper; but the gentleman might as well place to the account of the West, the disbursement for the fortifications intended to defend Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York, to all which capitals western produce is sent, and in the scurity of all of which the western people feel a lively interest. They do not object to expenditures for the army, for the navy, for fortifications, or for any other offensive or commercial object on the Atlantic, but they do think that their condition ought also to receive friendly attention from the general government. With respect to the State of Kentucky, not one cent of money, or one acre of land has been applied to any object of internal improvement within her limits. The subscription to the stock of the canal at Louisville was for an object in which many States were interested. The senator from Maryland complains that he has been unable to attain any aid for the railroad which the enterprise of Baltimore has projected, and in part executed. That was a great work, the conception of which was bold, and highly honorable, and it deserves national encouragement. But how has the committee of roads and canals, at this session, been constituted! The senator from Maryland possessed a brief authority to organize it, and, if I am not misinformed, a majority of the members composing it, appointed by him, are opposed both to the constitutionality of the power, and the expediency of exercising it.

And now, sir, I would address a few words to the friends of the American system in the Senate. The revenue must, ought to be, reduced. The country will not, after by the payment of the public debt ten or twelve millions of dollars become unnecessary, bear such an annual surplus. Its distribution would form a subject of perpetual coutention. Some of the opponents of the system understand the stratagem by which to attack it, and are shaping their course accordingly. It is to crush the system by the accumulation of revenue, and by the effort to persuade the people that they are unnecessarily taxed, while those would really tax them who would break up the native sources of supply, and render them dependent upon the foreign. But the revenue ought to be reduced, so as to accommodate it to the fact of the payment of the public debt. And the alternative is, or may be, to preserve the protecting system, and repeal the duties on the unprotected articles, or to preserve the duties on unprotected articles, and endanger, if not destroy, the system. Let us then adopt the measure before us, which will benefit all classes-the farmer, the professional man, the merchant, the manufacturer, the mechanic; and the cotton planter more than all. A few months ago there was no diversity of opinion as to the expediency of this measure. All, then, seemed to unite in the selection of

these objects for a repeal of duties which were not produced within the country. Such a repeal did not touch our domestic industry, violated no principle, offended no prejudice.

Can we not all, whatever may be our favorite theories, cordially unite on this neutral ground? When that is occupied, let us look beyond it, and see if any thing can be done in the field of protection, to modify, to improve it, or to satisfy those who are opposed to the system. Our southern brethren believe that it is injurious to them, and ask its repeal. We believe that its abandonment will be prejudicial to them, and ruinous to every other section of the Union. However strong their convictions may be, they are not stronger than ours. Between the points of the preservation of the system and its absolute repeal, there is no principle of union. If it can be shown to operate immoderately on any quarter; if the measure of protection to any article can be demonstrated to be undue and inordinate, it would be the duty of Congress to interpose and apply a remedy. And none will co-operate more heartily than I shall in the performance of that duty. It is quite probable that beneficial modifications of the system may be made without impairing its efficacy. But to make it fulfill the purposes of its institution, the measure of protection ought to be adequate. If it be not, all interests will be injuriously affected. The maufacturer, crippled in his exertions, will produce less perfect and dearer fabrics, and the consumer will feel the consequence. This is the spirit, and these are the prin ciples only, on which it seems to me that a settlement of the great question can be made, satisfactorily to all parts of our Union.

ON THE PUBLIC LANDS

IN SENATE, JUNE 20, 1832.

[IT was truly unfortunate for the country that some of Mr. Clay's most beneficent schemes for the public good, should have been frustrated by a jealousy of his fame and influence. This was especially true in the result of his long-protracted endeavor to secure an equitable distribution of the proceeds of the sale of the public domain among the States. This immense property was pledged for the public debt; but when the national debt was about being paid off, the question arose, What should be done with the proceeds of the sale of the public lands? In a message to the Twenty-second Congress, General Jackson recommended, that the unsold public lands, lying within any of the States, should be ceded to those States-a policy which, of course, if adopted, would apply to all new States, as they should come into the Union, and which would naturally engender a wild speculation in the settlement of new territories with that view. Nothing could be more unjust to the old thirteen States than this proposal, for it was chiefly at the expense of the Old Thirteen-expense of blood and treasure-that the public domain was acquired. But General Jackson wished to throw out a sop to the new States, where much of his strength lay; and knowing that Mr. Clay's policy was equal justice to all the States, he rushed into the opposite extreme, apparently for no other reason than to oppose Mr. Clay. The Jackson party, being a majority in the Senate, referred the subject of public lands to the committee on manufactures, of which Mr. Clay was chairman. This, in itself, requires explanation, since the subject naturally belonged to the committee on public lands. Jackson and Clay were both candidates for the presidency, and the Jackson party in the Senate wished to get a report from Mr. Clay on the public lands, which would injure him in the West. Hence the absurd reference of the subject to the committee on manufactures. Mr. Clay, however, as chairman of that committee,

took up the subject, and made a report, which was a perfect disappointment to those who meant to put him in an embarrassing position, and greatly increased his popularity throughout the country. Chagrined by this result, the Senate immediately referred the subject-where it ought to have gone at first, but where it was very improper to send it now-to the committee on public lands. But Mr. Clay's report was the only thing thereafter which could be entertained, in Congress or in the country. It was afterwards passed by both Houses of Congress, and vetoed by General Jackson. With the exception of the loan act, here the subject lay, till a Whig Congress came in with General Harrison, in 1841, when Mr. Clay again brought forward his land bill, which was passed by Congress, in a modified form, adapted to the time. But it was too late to carry out the beneficent plan, which was frustrated by General Jackson's veto. A fair distribution of the proceeds of the public lands among the States would have afforded them great facilities for internal improvement.]

IN rising to address the Senate, I owe, in the first place, the expression of my hearty thanks to the majority, by whose vote, just given, I am indulged in occupying the floor on this most important question. I am happy to see that the days when the sedition acts and gag laws were in force, and when screws were applied for the suppression of the freedom of speech and debate, are not yet to return; and that, when the consideration of a great question has been specially assigned to a particular day, it is not allowed to be arrested and thrust aside by any unexpected and unprecedented parliamentary maneuver. The decision of the majority demonstrates that feelings of liberality, and courtesy, and kindness, still prevail in the Senate; and that they will be extended even to one of the humblest members of the body; for such, I assure the Senate, I feel myself to be.

It may not be amiss again to allude to the extraordinary reference of the subject of the public lands to the committee on manufactures. I have nothing to do with the motives of honorable senators who composed the majority by which that reference was ordered. The decorum proper in this hall obliges me to consider their motives to have been pure and patriotic. But still I must be permitted to regard the proceeding as very unusual. The Senate has a standing committee on the public lands, appointed under long-established rules. The members of that committee are presumed to be well acquainted with the subject; they have some of them occupied the same station for many years, are well versed in the whole legislation on the public lands, and familiar with every branch of it; and four out of five of them come from the new States. Yet, with a full knowledge of all these circumstances, a reference was ordered by a major