that the present session would not pass away without legislation upon it. He was induced to look into this matter, from the fact of the great disparity in the length of the sessions, which disparity, too, was continually increasing, by the continual increase of the long sessions. The idea of equalizing the sessions, whatever their necessary length might be, seemed to be a reasonable one, and the increasing length of the long session had become a grievance and an evil which ought to be remedied. The third of March, from long usage and custom of this Government, had generally been looked upon as the termination of every Congress. But it was not necessarily so, not being established as such either by the constitution or by law. He stated it as a fact, that, since the first organization under the constitution of the United States, Congress had passed no law on the subject. There was nothing in the statute book about it, and the Senate of the United States had never acted upon it. There was nothing in existence upon this subject but a resolution of the old Congress of the 13th of September, 1788, which was obviously intended as an incipient and temporary regulation; and so the thing has rested

ever since.

A glance at the history of this matter, said Mr. H., will be sufficient to show us the propriety of legislating upon it. The convention which formed the constitution of the United States reported that instrument to the Congress of the confederation on the 17th of September, 1787, and on the 28th of the same month Congress resolved that the constitution so reported be transmitted to the States for their ratification. On the 13th of September, 1788, Congress declared that the constitution thus transmitted had been ratified by a sufficient nu:nber of the States to give it effect. It was then necessary that measures be taken for the organization of the federal Government under it; and on the same 13th of September, 1788, the Congress of the confederation resolved that the first Wednesday of January next ensuing be the day for appointing electors in the several States which before that day should have ratified the constitution; that the first Wednesday of the ensuing February should be the day appointed for the electors to assemble in their respective States and vote for a President; and that the first Wednesday of March next be the time, and the then seat of Government the place, for commencing the proceedings under the constitution. Now, this first Wednesday of March next, said Mr. H., happened to be the fourth day of March, 1789, and this was the only reason why the fourth day of March, in every second year, has ever since been sanctioned, by usage and custom, as the commencement of the Congressional term; and the reason why the previous day, the third of March, has been considered the close of the term.

And here he remarked that, in this view of the subject, the delicacy felt by many members in protracting the sessions of the third of March beyond midnight was without any good reason: for, taking it for granted that the Congressional term of two years commenced on the 4th of March, the two years would not expire till the same hour of the day on the 4th in which the first session of 1789 was opened. The truth is, said Mr. II., the constitution says nothing about the 4th of March as the commencement of the term; nor does any law, save the resolution of the old Congress before referred to. The constitution merely says that "the House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people." And in reference to the meeting of Congress, or the commencement of the sessions, it says that "the Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different day."

[DEC. 24, 1835.

It is obvious, then, that the whole subject is open for legislation. Congress cannot, indeed, say that the Con|gressional term of two years shall hereafter commence at an earlier day than the 4th of March; because that would infringe upon the constitutional term of the Congress in being when this arrangement should commence; but Congress can say that the commencement of the term shall be on any subsequent day, and that the sessions shall commence at any time thought to be most

convenient.

The power, then, of regulating these matters by law being unquestionable, the propriety and necessity of doing so is scarcely less certain. He had said that the increasing length of the long sessions had become an evil which ought to be remedied. For proof of this, it was only necessary to look back a few years upon our journals for the dates of our adjournments. During the last session, Mr. H. said he had procured to be made out a statement showing the commencement and termination, and the number of days, in each session of Congress held under the constitution. A reference to this statement would show that, in the history of this Government, in times of peace, there had been no session at all equal in length to the long sessions of the last two Congresses; the sessions which terminated in 1832 and 1834. The session of 1812, when war was declared, was a few days longer than that of 1832, but the latter was much longer than any other session during the war. The long session of 1798, during our troubles with France, was the longest session since the adoption of the constitution. That, and the one just mentioned, of 1812, were the only sessions of greater length than that of 1832; and these and one other, that of 1790, are the only sessions as long as that of 1834. The long sessions since the last war had all terminated in April and May, save the last two.

There is, Mr. President, much evil in this tendency to perpetual Parliaments. We all know that they are not needed on account of legislative business; for the statute book, the journals, and our documents, show that during a short session as much useful business is generally done as in a long one. High party times, such as we have had for years past, and such as existed in 1798, give occasion for long sessions. Such times have a tendency to protract the sessions that are not limited by law; but, whether for good or for evil, is very questionable. Such times and such sessions are not well calculated to throw oil upon the troubled waters; and party broils and national discords are generally heightened, and often engendered, by lengthy and excited discussions here. A law, then, that would fix the termination of every regular session, giving time enough for all useful discussion and legislative deliberation, is, as I believe, greatly to be desired. The necessary business would then all be done, and probably with much more certainty and accuracy than as the matter now stands. The day of adjournment being fixed, business would be shaped in reference to that day, and much less time would be uselessly disposed of.

He would not, however, further pursue these remarks, but would content himself, for the present, with offering a resolution on the subject, and with moving that the statement referred to be printed.

Mr. WEBSTER rose to state that he concurred in what had fallen from the Senator from Indiana. That gentleman had stated with entire correctness the manner in which every term of the members of the old Congress commenced on the 4th of March, and terminated on the 3d of March, of every second year therefrom. It did not appear on the record of the votes and proceedings of the old Congress that that body adjourned as a matter of necessity, on the 3d or 4th of March. All that appeared was, that Congress, as soon as the con

DEC. 28, 1835.]

stitution was ratified by nine States, as it was their duty to do, put the new Government in operation; and that they were called together, in the city of New York, on the first Wednesday in March, 1789. The first Wednesday happened to be on the 4th of March, and as that dav had been fixed, the 4th of March came to be considered as the commencement and end of the term of service of Senators and Representatives, for six and two years, respectively, and not the first Wednesday in March, which would be a variable period. He concurred in the general observations which had fallen from the gentleman from Indiana, but he thought it doubtful whether we could change the day of the commencement of the term of the session, because, since the practice has grown into a law, some of the States have recognised the Congressional term as beginning and terminating on that day, and this cannot be altered. This he suggested without examination of the subject.

But if it was found to be inconvenient in this respect, the chief object of the Senator might still be accomplished. It would be convenient to meet on the first Monday in November, and to give to every alternate session an addition of a month or six weeks. To such a difference in the length of the sessions there could be no objection, because the first session of every Congress is the long one, and, by the rules of the House, in certain stages, the business was continued from session to session, therefore less time was required at the second session. If a law were to be passed fixing both sessions to commence on the first Monday in November, and the second to terminate on the 3d of March, while the first session may be allowed to continue longer, he thought much good might result from the change. He was of the opinion that the present system was an evil, and it would be a great convenience if gentlemen could be able to ascertain precisely the time when their duties here would terminate. With this general concurrence of the views of the Senator from Indiana, he hoped the resolution would be adopted.

Mr. CLAYTON said that there were other reasons than the lateness of the period at which this subject was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary at the last session, for their delay in then recommending to the Senate any alteration in the periods of commencing and terminating the sessions of Congress. It was not understood that a provision for commencing each session on the first of November, as suggested by the gentleman from Massachusetts, would not clash with provisions in some of the States fixing the time of electing Representatives, or render it necessary for those States to alter their constitutions. In some States the election of Representatives in November is provided for by their constitutions. [Mr. WEBSTER said he knew of one-Mississippi.] Mr. C. said there was at least one other, the State, he in part represented, although there the election occurred a year before the commencement of each new Congress. How far these constitutional provisions in other cases may form impediments to legislative action on this subject, the committee had not determined, and indeed it would require much consideration of the State laws and constitutions, which have been often changed or modified, to decide upon an unexceptionable measure to equalize the sessions. He was favorable to the object of the resolution, but the committee would not act without full information of the consequences of any measure which might be proposed to attain the end desired; and he desired, in the event of the adoption of the resolution, that a Senator from each State should inform them of the operation of any plan suggested upon his own section of country.

This resolution, which was considered and agreed to, and the statement accompanying it, were ordered to be printed.

[SENATE.

Mr. PRESTON, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported the bill concerning cases of appeals in suits arising out of the revenue laws, with an amendment. The Senate proceeded to the consideration of execu tive business; and, after a short time spent therein, Adjourned till Monday.

MONDAY, DECEMBER 28. ALEXANDRIA MEMORIAL. Among other memorials presented to day,

Mr. BENTON presented the petition of sundry citi zens of Alexandria, District of Columbia, numerously signed, on the subject of the financial condition of that town. The petitioners state, said Mr. B., that the corporate authorities of Alexandria had, to say the least of it, greatly mismanaged the affairs of the town, and that the town had been involved in difficulties and debts beyond its ability to pay; a state of things bearing hard on the middling and industrious classes. The petitioners prayed to be relieved from their Holland debt, and for such other relief in their embarrassments as Congress, in its wisdom, might see fit to grant. Mr. B. presumed that this petition had been put into his hands in consequence of some remarks he made a few days ago on the subject of the District banks, a kindred subject, referring to the embarrassed financial condition of this ten miles square, created, as he believed, by great mismanagement. It was not for him to say any thing in aggravation of the case set out by the petitioners. They were, some of them, no doubt, known to some of the members of the Committee on the District, who would inquire into all the circumstances referred to in the memorial. He would move to refer the petition to the Committee on the District of Columbia; which motion was agreed to. SUFFERERS BY FIRE IN NEW YORK.

Mr. WRIGHT said he was charged with the presentation of a memorial on behalf of the citizens of the city of New York, and more especially in behalf of that portion of those citizens who were sufferers by the late conflagration in that city. Consequent upon that unexampled calamity, a public meeting of the citizens of the city was called, and a committee of one hundred and twenty-five persons, distinguished for their standing, was appointed to prepare a memorial to Congress for such relief as it might be supposed Congress could afford. The memorial he held had proceeded from that committee, and was signed by its chairman.

Mr. W. said the memorial was too long to authorize him to ask for its reading at the Secretary's table, and he would therefore state, in the condensed language of the memorial itself, the relief prayed for, which was as follows:

1. "A remission or refunding of duties on goods in original packages, which have been destroyed by the late conflagration.

2. "An extension of credit on all the existing bonds for duties payable in this city, and falling due after the 16th of this month.

3. "A general temporary extension of the time of payment of cash and other duties on goods imported into the United States subsequent to the 16th of this

month.

4. "An investment of a portion of the unappropriated surplus revenue of the United States, in such periods and such manner as will afford relief to the city of New York."

These, Mr. W. said, were the specific modes of relief prayed for in the memorial. It was not his purpose to consider them at this time; but he felt it to be a duty he owed to his colleague and himself, upon the presentation of this memorial, to trouble the Senate with a sin

gle remark. This signal calamity upon a very numerous and most important portion of their immediate constituents had not been unnoticed by them, or failed to excite their most lively anxieties; but upon full deliberation they had believed that they, as the immediate representatives of the State in this body, should best discharge their duties here, and best consult the interests of those who had suffered, to wait any action, so far as action of Congress might be expected, until the specific wishes of those immediately concerned, and therefore most competent to specify their wants, should be made known. That had now been done in the memorial he held in his hand, and he most cheerfully communicated those wishes to the Senate. For the single reason assigned, and for no other, his colleague and himself, up to this time, had remained silent upon this important subject, and had not made any proposition, or in any shape brought the matter to the notice of the Senate. Mr. W. then moved that the memorial, without a reading, be referred to the Committee on Finance, and that the same be printed.

Mr. WEBSTER said he hoped the memorial would be printed with all possible despatch, that the members of the Senate might have an opportunity to read it. It appeared to be a long and reasoned paper, stating the grounds, both of right and expediency, on which relief, in the specified modes, was asked.

These modes were different, and all entitled to much consideration. For the present, he should express an opinion only on one of them, and that was the last. In that, the memorialists asked, substantially, for such an investment of the surplus revenue, or proper portions of it, as would be advantageous to the commercial community of New York. I have regarded this (said Mr. W.) as the most ready, plain, and effectual mode of present relief. It is known that the amount of revenue now on hand, and for which there is no immediate call, is great. It is understood that some millions lie in a single deposite bank in the city of New York, locked up from all public use. The emergency of the case calls for such a disposition of these funds, as that, to a just and proper extent, they may be the basis of a discount, to meet the new created wants of the merchants. Immediate means are wanted, some provision to meet existing obligations, till time shall be allowed for other arrangements, and other dispositions of business. short, it is a great object to make the money market easy, if possible, during the excitement and the distress occasioned by this great disaster. The Government can readily do much towards producing this effect, without the slightest public inconvenience.

In

I have heard that the deposite banks cannot discount to the amount of their means, on account of the limitations of their respective charters.

[DEC. 29, 1835.

Senate with newspapers, was read a second time, and
ordered to be engrossed for a third reading.
After spending some time in executive business,
The Senate adjourned.

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 29.

DISTRIBUTIVE LAND BILL:

After the usual preliminary business of the morning had been gone through with,

Mr. CLAY rose and addressed the Chair. Although (said he) I find myself borne down by the severest affliction with which Providence has ever been pleased to visit me, I have thought that my private griefs ought not longer to prevent me from attempting, ill as I feel qualified, to discharge my public duties. And I now rise, in pursuance of the notice which has been given, to ask leave to introduce a bill to appropriate, for a limited time, the proceeds of the sales of the public lands of the United States, and for granting land to certain States.

In

I feel it incumbent on me to make a brief explanation of the higbly important measure which I have now the honor to propose. The bill, which I desire to introduce, provides for the distribution of the proceeds of the public lands in the years 1833, '34, '35, '36, and '37, among the twenty-four States of the Union, and conforms substantially to that which passed in 1833. It is, therefore, of a temporary character; but, if it shall be found to have salutary operation, it will be in the power of a future Congress to give it an indefinite continuance; and, if otherwise, it will expire by its own terms. the event of war unfortunately breaking out with any foreign Power, the bill is to cease, and the fund which it distributes is to be applied to the prosecution of the war. The bill directs that ten per cent. of the nett proceeds of the public lands, sold within the limits of the seven new States, shall be first set apart for them, in addition to the five per cent. reserved by their several compacts with the United States; and that the residue of the proceeds, whether from sales made in the States or Territories, shall be divided among the twenty-four States in proportion to their respective federal popula tion. In this respect the bill conforms to that which was introduced in 1832. For one, I should have been willing to have allowed the new States twelve and a half instead of ten per cent.; but, as that was objected to by the President in his veto message, and has been opposed in other quarters, I thought it best to restrict the allowance to the more moderate sum. The bill also contains large and liberal grants of land to several of the new States, to place them on an equality with others to which the bounty of Congress has been heretofore extended, and provides that, when other new States shall be admitted into the Union, they shall receive their share of the common fund.

The memorial was referred to the Committee on Finance.

Several bills and resolutions were now successively taken up and appropriately disposed of, without debate; among which

The joint resolution for supplying the members of the

This

aggregate is what the bill proposes to distribute and pay to the twenty-four States on the 1st day of May, 1836, upon the principles which I have stated. The difference between the estimate made by the Secretary of the Treasury and that which I have cffered of the product of the last quarter of this year, arises from my having taken, as the probable sum, one third of the total amount of the first three quarters, and he some other conjectural sum. Deducting from the $21,047,404 39 the fifteen per cent. to which the seven new States, according to the bill, will be first entitled, amounting to $2,612,350 18,

there will remain for distribution among the twenty-four States of the Union the sum of $18,435,054 21. Of this sum the proportion of Kentucky will be $960,947 41, of Virginia the sum of $1,581,669 39, of North Carolina $988,632 42, and of Pennsylvania $2,083,233 32. The proportion of Indiana, including the fifteen per cent., will be $855,588 23, of Ohio $1,677,110 84, and of Mississippi $958,945 42. And the proportions of all the twenty-four States are indicated in a table which I hold in my hand, prepared at my instance in the office of the Secretary of the Senate, and to which any Senator may have access. The grounds on which the extra allowance is made to the new States are, first, their complaint that all lands sold by the federal Government are five years exempted from State taxation; secondly, that it is to be applied in such manner as will augment the value of the unsold public lands within them; and, lastly, their recent establishment.

*

It may be recollected that a bill passed both Houses of Congress, in the session which terminated on the 3d March, 1833, for the distribution of the amount received from the public lands upon the principles of that now offered. The President, in his message at the commencement of the previous session, had specially invited the attention of Congress to the subject of the public lands; had adverted to their liberation from the pledge for the payment of the public debt; and had intimated his readiness to concur in any disposal of them which might appear to Congress most conducive to the quiet, harmony, and general interest of the American people. After such a message, the President's disapprobation of the bill could not have been anticipated. It was presented to him on the 2d of March, 1833. It was not re

The following is the table referred to by Mr. CLAY: Statement showing the dividend of each State (according to its federal population) of the proceeds of the public lands, during the years 1833, '4, and '5, after deducting from the amount 15 per cent. previously allowed to the

seven new States.

[SENATE.

turned as the constitution requires, but was retained by him after the expiration of his official term, and until the next session of Congress, which had no power to act upon it. It was understood and believed that, in anticipation of the passage of the bill, the President had prepared objections to it, which he had intended to return with his negative; but he did not. If the bill had been returned, there is reason to believe that it would have passed, notwithstanding those objections. In the House it had been carried by a majority of more than two thirds. And, in the Senate, although there was not that majority on its passage, it was supposed that, in consequence of the passage of the compromise bill, some of the Senators who had voted against the land bill had changed their views, and would have voted for it upon its return, and others had left the Senate.

There are those who believe that the bill was unconstitutionally retained by the President, and is now the law of the land. But whether it be so or not, the general Government holds the public domain in trust for the common benefit of all the States; and it is, therefore, competent to provide by law that the trustee shall make distribution of the proceeds of the three past years, as well as future years, among those entitled to the beneficial interest. The bill makes such a provision. And it is very remarkable that the sum which it proposes to distribute is about the gross surplus or balance estimated in the treasury on the 1st of January, 1836. When the returns of the last quarter of the year come it, it will probably be found that the surplus is larger than the sum which the bill distributes. But if it should not be, there will remain the seven millions held in the Bank of the United States, applicable, as far as it may be received, to the service of the ensuing year.

war.

It would be premature now to enter into a consideration of the probable revenue of future years; but, at the proper time, I think it will not be difficult to show that, exclusive of what may be received from the public lands, it will be abundantly sufficient for all the economical purposes of Government in a time of peace. And the bill, as I have already stated, provides for seasons of I wish to guard against all misconception by repeating, what I have heretofore several times said, that this bill is not founded upon any notion of a power in Congress to lay and collect taxes, and distribute the amount among the several States. I think Congress possesses no such power, and has no right to exercise it until some such amendment as that proposed by the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] shall be adopted. But the bill rests on the basis of a clear and comprehensive grant of power to Congress over the Territories and property of the United States in the constitution, and upon express stipulations in the deeds of cession.

Mr. President, I have ever regarded with feelings of the profoundest regret the decision which the President of the United States felt himself induced to make on the bill of 1833. If it had been his pleasure to approve it, the heads of Departments would not now be taxing their ingenuity to find out useless objects of expenditure, or objects which may be well postponed to a more distant day. If the bill had passed, about twenty millions of dollars would have been, during the last three years, in the hands of the several States, applicable by them to the beneficent purposes of internal improvement, education, or colonization. What immense benefits might not have been diffused throughout the land by the active employment of that large sum! What new channels of commerce and communication might not have been opened! What industry stimulated, what labor rewarded! How many youthful minds might have received the blessings of education and knowledge, and been rescued from ignorance, vice, and ruin! How many