k ' < 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^^^'-^ 
 
 

 ^^v 
 ^^-r, 
 
 
 3 *;^7» 0' «*•- 
 
 
RElNfARKS 
 
 HON. WADDY THOMPSON. 
 
 PROPOSITION TO RECOGNISE THE REPUBLIC OF HAYTI; 
 
 llX THE MOXrON TO 
 
 i'RTNT CERTAIN DOCUMENTS RELATING TO DEFALCATIONS; 
 
 ANII ON CERTAIN 
 
 APPROPRIATIONS FOR NAVY YARDS. 
 
 Delivered in tlie House of Kepi-esentatives, Dec. 22 micl 28, 1838, and Jan. 10, 18;19. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 PRINTED RY OAI, ES AND S EATON, 
 1839. 
 
Esse 
 
REMARKS. 
 
 Saturday, December 22, 1838. 
 
 The House having under consideration a motion made by Mr. Adajis, Id refer a peti- 
 tion for the recognition of the republic of Hayti to the Committee on Foreign Afl'airs, 
 with instructions to consider and report thereon — 
 
 Mr. Waddy Thompson, of South Carolina, said : He rose not to discuss 
 tliis question, but, if possible, to arrest the discussion. He did not regard 
 the discussion of this matter in the light in which some genllemen viewed it. 
 In one sense it was dangerous to discuss it ; but, to liis mind, it was worse 
 than dangerous — it was dishonorable and degrading in any Southern man to 
 discuss it, here or elsewhere. There was only one jiosition becoming the 
 honor of a Southern man, and that was to meet all efforts on this subject with 
 proud aud scornful defiance. What was the proposition now before the 
 House? Upon our dearest rights, (continued Mr. T.,) on questions afl'ecting 
 our interests, our charactt'r, and our honor, we are driven to a miserable sys- 
 tem of special pleading, which would be unbeconiing in a county court law- 
 yer. Recourse is had to one device after another to bring this matter up, and 
 it is treated with a levity amounting almost to indecency. But what is the 
 proposition? I do not intend to argue it. 1 should disgrace myself and 
 those I re[)resentif I were to do so. This is not the place to meet it. 
 
 [Mr. T. here gave way to Mr. Wise, who said : These are very strong ex- 
 pressions that the gentleman from South Carolina uses. / have discussed this 
 question here, and I have raised the question whether petitions for the rec- 
 ognition of the independence of an insurrectionary black republic shall be 
 received here — in a country where slavery is tolerated. I discussed it ne- 
 cessarily, in the defence of my people — in defence of their rights, feelings, and 
 prejudices — and I shall discuss it again. Why ? Because, on the very 
 question of reception, but thirty-two names out of two hundred and forty-two 
 members of this House were found in support of the position I took against 
 the reception. It is useless and idle now for us to take the high ground of 
 not discussing this subject, when it is marched upon ns by the South itself — 
 yes, by the South itself.] 
 
 Mr. Thompson resumed. The House, he trusted, could not have misun- 
 derstood him. He alluded to a particular subject, which he had refrained 
 from mentioning, for the purpose of avoiding infringement of the rules of the 
 House. His own individual opinion was, that the South lost cMste and char- 
 acter in discussing that subject at all. He knew, however, that honorable 
 men, and that the gentleman from Virginia himself, (Mr. Wise,) had 
 discussed it; but the time would come when it would be seen that it was 
 not to be discussed here. But it was a matter now in which the pride of 
 
the South was injured by discussion. What was the particular proposition 
 before, tlie House? The uniform usage of the House — to -refer, without in- 
 structions — was to be departed from, and an especial prominence was to be giv- 
 en to this matter — a matter which ought, of all others, to be driven out of 
 this House with scorn. In the language of a gentleman from Massachusetts, 
 (Mr. Grennell,) a black minister may be sent here ; but we were to rely on 
 the discretion of President Boye^, whether he was to do that which would 
 make the institutions of this country reel and totter like a drunken man — 
 whether he was to do that which would throw us into such a condition that 
 nothing but the interposition of God alone could save us. He (Mr. T.) 
 would say that the very landing on the American soil of such a minister would 
 be the knell of our Government and our institutions. 
 
 In conclusion, he would remark that, if he had one political prayer above 
 another, which he addressed to the throne of the Almighty, it was that He 
 would brjng this matter to a practical, a definite, and a conclusive issue. I, 
 for one, (continued Mr. T.,) am not afraid of that issue. I desire it, above all 
 things. God grant that when it does come the institutions of the country 
 may survive it. I believe that the institutions of the South will not survive 
 it, unless the issue be speedily made. The greatest blessing to the South, 
 and that for which we most fervently pray, is, that this issue may be made as 
 speedily as possible, and that the power sought by the fanatics here and else- 
 where may be given to them. Let them come up to the scratch and execute 
 their purpose. We shall then know exactly where wg stand. 
 
 Friday, December 28, 1838. 
 
 Mr. Wise having made a motion to print 20,000 extra copies of certain documents 
 relating to the Swartwout and other defalcations, and this motion being opposed by some 
 of the leading members of the administration party — 
 
 Mr. Waddy Thompson, of South Carolina, said that, since he had held a 
 seat on this floor, he never before remembered an instance in which the 
 prominent men of the party had refused to print the largest number of a docu- 
 ment not emanating from the opposition, but from the party themselves, and 
 a Department of the Government. The opposition had long stood in this 
 position : that the only light whicli they could get was dragged forth, extorted 
 from the public functionaries of the country. All we want (Mr. T. continued) 
 is light. If ever the prayer of Ajax, " Give us, yc gods, hut light," were 
 applicable to the condition of any party, it is so here, in reference to the 
 opposition. Give us light, and victory and triumph await that party. 
 
 What is the objection made to this document'? It is, that it is stale. 
 Probably it may be so. Probably it is obsolete. Probably peculation will 
 now be acknowledged to be, as it is in truth, the order of the day, and honor 
 and integrity are olisolcte. If they are not obsolete', there are facts contained 
 in this document which never can become so. There is one single fact in 
 that document, the publication of which, looking to it oven in a pecuniary 
 point of view, is worth hundreds and thousands of dollars. What is it? It 
 is that on which so nmch stress has been hiid by the gentleman from Mis- 
 sissippi, (Mr. Prentiss,) and previously by the gentleman from Virginia, 
 (Mr. W^iSE,) that whilst your President now with alacrity rushes not only 
 upon Swartwout, but upon his securities, by a sunmiary process, almost, if 
 
not quite, in violation of the constitution, the Secretary of the Treasury has, 
 in another instance, perniitted the law to slumber from day to day, and from 
 year to year, wiih the knowledge of the most gross peculations — not pecula- 
 tions simply — that is too soft a term for such flagrant dishonesty. Take the 
 case given yesterday, tchtre a man puts dovm to himself public lands as 
 SOLD, WHEN THEY HAD NOT BEEN SOLD, and then kos not the honesty to pay 
 even that small modicum with which he has charged himself. 
 
 But there are collateral enormities in all these acts. The act which the 
 President says deserves nothing less than the ignominious punishment of a fel- 
 on, is not only connived at, but a premium oflered for it. Here is a man whom 
 the Secretary has been supplicating — not dismissing with the prompt indig- 
 nation which ought to have ibilowed such proceedings — but supplicating from 
 day to day to give up the money which he had taken. And yet this very 
 man was reappointed, after the perpetration of repeated acts which, the 
 President now says, ought to be made felony. Let the people have the facts. 
 The people of this country are honest at the core. Give them light ; let 
 them see that their functionaries have done thus and thus, and my life upon 
 the result. 
 
 But this document is stale. When did it become stale? It never can be 
 stale until corruption prevails all over the land. Here are men convicted of 
 frauds, who are not only tolerated, but are reappointed to office. 1 say in 
 sincerity, that I believe that if the people will submit to acts of this kind, 
 they are no longer capable of self-goveinment. They are no longer fit to be 
 free, for they are no longer honest. The gentleman says there are excusa- 
 tory facts. I only speak of facts as they are here presented. But suppose 
 it should turn out that these mpn worn not defaulters: what does that matterl 
 The Government thought that they were so, when they trusted them again. 
 They thought they were peculators, and reappointed and continued them ; 
 that they had been guilty of ofiences worthy the ignominious punishment of 
 a felon, and yet they were reappointed. Still, if there are excusatory facts, 
 let gentlemen bring them out; I will go for the publication of an equal num- 
 ber of all such documents, and 1 will send one of them to each man to whom 
 I may transmit one containing the damning facts set forth in this present 
 document. 
 
 At a subsequent stage of the debate, in reply to Mr. Thomas, of Maryland — 
 
 Mr. Thompson said that one of the remarks of the gentleman from Mary- 
 land sounded somewhat strangely in his ear. It was this : that the present 
 administration was not responsible, because the cases contained in the report 
 occurred during the past administration. 
 
 [Mr. Thomas explained. He said that any attempt to hold this adminis- 
 tration res|)onsible for the defalcations stated in document 111 must be futile, 
 since defalcations had happened under all administrations.] 
 
 Well, sir, (said Mr. Thompson,) what is the position now taken by the 
 gentleman ? Why, that because defalcations have taken place under all ad- 
 ministrations, and in the nature of things will take place, therefore the 
 administration is not to be held responsible for continuing in office and reap- 
 pointing known defaulters ; men who, without excuse or palliation, had em- 
 bezzled the public money. Defalcations may have taken place under all 
 administrations; but were the delinquents reappointed to office after a knowl- 
 edge of their frauds? That is the gravamen of the charge. It is in this 
 that we say that peculation was not only tolerated but encouraged. In one 
 of the cases the embezzlement was not denied, but was admitted, and a bond 
 
given for the amount, and the officer reappointed. It shows, sir, as was said 
 by the gentleman from Mississippi, that their morality is the Spartan, by 
 which the offence does not consist in doing the act, but in doing it so bung- 
 Jingly as to be discovered ; that virtue which Shakspeare ascribes to the 
 Venetian ladles — not to leave undone, but to keep unknown. It is saying, 
 in no unequivocal language, embezzle, use, and speculate on the public 
 money as much as you choose, provided you keep it concealed. But it is 
 said that these things took place under the late administration ; that it is not 
 the fox that has broken into the roost, but the lion. Ay, yes, sir, we are now 
 beyond the reach of that lion's paw. 
 
 But, sir, all these robberies of the Treasury sink into utter insignificancy 
 in comparison with the stupendous proposal to legalize such a system, and 
 make it perpetual. This, we are told, is to be a constitutional Treasury. 
 Yes, sir, every thing is baptized " constitutional" in these days. I tliink I 
 saw the other day, in some paper published "down East," an advertisement 
 of" constitutional pens," and with just as much reason. What is the gentle- 
 man's argument for this independent Treasury] Why, sir, it is, that we 
 cannot avoid having agents to receive the public money, faithless as they 
 now have been proven to be; and what would common sense draw as an in- 
 ference from that? Why, merely, that if we must have them, and as they 
 are liable to temptation, we ought to trust them as little as possible. But 
 what is the gentleman's inference 1 It is that, as they cannot be trusted with 
 small sums, he is for trusting them with all the revenue. The gentleman 
 seems to reverse the scriptural principle of recompense, " because thou hast 
 heen faithful in a few things, I will make thee lord over many things ;" but 
 his principle seems to be, " because thou hast been faithless in a few things, 
 I will make thee ruler over many." We have had two classes of agents, 
 banks and individuals. The first have been faithful beyond anticipation ; the 
 latter faithless to a general and alarming extent. We have lost by banks as 
 depositories less than a million, from the foundation of the Government; 
 whilst we have lost by one single sub-treasurer a million and a quarter. [Mr. 
 Cambreleng said we have lost forty millions by banks.] No, sir, said Mr. 
 T., I know better. I know that such a statement has been in public docu- 
 ments, and one emanating from that gentleman ; hut it is a fraud to say so — 
 a fraud in argument, I mean. I will give the gentleman the precise amount 
 lost by banks as depositories — $759,000. In the reports alluded to, this sum 
 is swelled by charging upon the banks the loss from the use of their depreci- 
 ated paper. Let us examine this shallow deception. It was during the war 
 that this depreciated paper was used : what else could be done ? There was 
 not ten millions of specie in the country, and annual appropriations of fifty 
 millions. Specie was clearly out of the question. Treasury notes were the 
 only alternative, and they were tried, and the result was, that they were at 
 a discount muchbelow bank notes, and this in the limited amounts issued, 
 from the fact that bank notes were used. But if bank notes had been reject- 
 ed, and Treasury notes issued, they would have fallen to the worthlessness of 
 continental money. As it was, they were greatly below paper money. 
 Yes, sir, we have lost nearly twice as much by one sub-treasurer as we 
 have lost in all from banks, from the foundation of the Government. 
 What does this comparison show ? It shows, as clear as the light, the 
 superior safety of banks. No man here will dare rise in his place and at- 
 tempt to prove that indebtedness from corporations is not a more safe con- 
 dition than indebtedness from individuals. We have tried both. We have 
 
found the one class dishonest, tempted even by small sums to defraud the 
 public, and led on to peculate at last to the amount of millions. And what is 
 the remedy 1 Why, sir, to make them tho depositaries of our entire revenue- 
 That is the logic. Were these logicians acting in their own private affairs, I 
 am apt to think they would draw sounder conclusions. 
 
 Take this case of Swartwout. In carrying the public funds from the 
 custom-house to the bank, he embezzled more than a million ; the panacea 
 is, to give him miilionn on millions to keep permanently. Small sums are not 
 safe whilst merely in transitu from the custom-house to the bunk ; but we 
 are urged to trust millions to them permanently; and why? Because of the 
 additional cobweb securities of this bill. It is-, in my judgment, a most unsafe 
 mode of keeping the public money, and fearfully demoralizing in its tendency. 
 If adopted, as expunging is the order of the day, it would be well to expunge 
 from the Lord's Prayer that admirable passage, "Lead us not into temptation." 
 
 Mr. T. said he took no pleasure in thus early being forced into a discus- 
 sion of this question. But the gentleman from Maryland had introduced it, 
 and he could not permit his remarks to pass unanswered. Mr. T. was aware 
 of the many considerations that demanded that he should measure his lan- 
 guage upon this subject. The State which he in part represented held differ- 
 ent opinions from himself, and he did not hesitate now to say, when improp- 
 er motives can scarcely be attributed to him, that there is no community upon 
 earth for whose enlightened patriotism he had so profound a respect. This is no 
 new opinion ; it had grown with his growth, and strengthened with his 
 strength ; it was more than an opinion; it was a sentiment, a passion ; and 
 he would add, in all sincerity, that never was the State (he spoke of the 
 State, not of individuals) actuated by a rnore sincere conviction, or a more 
 disinterested patriotism, in any of those periods which have lieretofore so 
 gloriously marked her high career. If he had any doubts on the question, he 
 would long since have surrendered his opinions to those of the State. But 
 believing, and, indeed, knowing, as he did, he never could support, and never 
 should cease to oppose, with all his poor powers, so disastrous a measure. 
 He greatly doubted whether the people of this country ever would practical- 
 ly elect another President ; whether we have not taken the step fatal to all 
 other republics, of the President nominating his successor. Adopt this sys- 
 tem, and he saw little hope of resistance to any future administration. 
 
 Thursday, January 10, 1839. 
 
 The House being in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, and having 
 under consideration the bill for extending and improving the navy yard at Brooklyn, New 
 York, and for constructing a dry dock at the same ; which bill Mr. Patnter moved to 
 amend by adding a new section, appropriating $100,000 for a dry dock at Philadelphia — 
 
 Mr. W. Thompson said he had almost made up his mind, after the course 
 which the present, or, he should more properly say, the late administration 
 had pursued towards the South on the subject of navy yards, never to vote for 
 another appropriation for a Northern navy yard, even if the alternative pre- 
 sented to him should be the rotting of the whole navy. He intended, however, 
 to vote for this appropriation for a dry dock at New York. There were two 
 or three line of battle ships now m that port, which were absolutely rotting for 
 want of it ; and though he could not, under such circumstances, withhold his 
 assent to the appropriation, yet he confessed he yielded it most reluctantly. 
 
8 
 
 And when he made this declaration, he trusted that his course in this House, 
 and more especially in reference to the section of country from which he 
 came, would exempt him from the imputation of being influenced by any un- 
 worthy spirit of jealousy, or by any desire to enter into the miserable scram- 
 ble for the public money or the public offices. 
 
 This was almost the only branch of the public service in which the South 
 could receive any appropriations. Deeply solicitous as the whole South is 
 for the success of our great enterprise, the Charleston and Cincinnati rail- 
 road, we do not ask, and cannot even receive, an appropriation from this 
 Government. 
 
 Look at the situation of your Southern coast, (continued Mr. T.) There 
 is not a place, from Norfolk to the Gulf of Mexico, where even a long-boat 
 can be repaired. And although three years since I succeeded in extorling 
 from the House, by rallying Southern and Western gentlemen, and by put- 
 ting them upon their metal, an appropriation for the naval establishment at 
 Pensacola, yet none of that money has been laid out. It was grudgingly 
 given, and has not yet been expended. Under these circumstances, I shall 
 vote in favor of this appropriation, but I will not vote for it if it is con- 
 nected with any rider whatsoever. 
 
 Mr. Thompson having afterwards moved to amend the amendment, by inserting an 
 appropriation of $100,000 for a navy yard at Pensacola, and the debate having been fur- 
 ther continued — 
 
 Mr. Thompson said that there could be no more just exponent of the times 
 we live in, and the mode of doing business in this body, than the extreme 
 anxiety of gentlemen to rush this bill tiirough the House after an hour's dis- 
 cussion, and with an almost total ignorance of every important fact involved. 
 We are asked to make a beginning in an appropriation which will require 
 two millions to complete the work, without estimates of any sort, without any 
 reasons showing its necessity, or, if necessary at all, that the points proposed 
 are the most advantageous. Why this " indecent haste" to expend millions, 
 and what makes it worse, with a bankrupt Treasury 1 He had not offered 
 his amendment for the paltry purpose of defeating the measure. He dis- 
 dained to resort to such tricks. But he believed, nay, he did not hesitate 
 to say, that he would prove, beyond the possibility of refutation, that the in- 
 terests of the country demanded a dry dock at Pensacola more than at New 
 York and Piiiladelphia both put together. What, sir, is the chief use of a 
 dry dock? Not for building, but for repairing vessels. We have now a 
 dry dock at Norfolk and one at Boston, and it is proposed to have another 
 at New York, to which he did not object. But what earthly use can there be 
 for another at Philadelphia, when there is one on either side of that place 
 within a hundred miles ? Is not that enough in all conscience, and, more es- 
 pecially, when there is not, from the capes of the Chesapeake to the Sabine, 
 a single point at which even a long-boat can be repaired 1 As to building 
 ships, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sergeant) tells you that the 
 largest ship ever built in America, the Pennsylvania, was built at Philadel- 
 phia, as a proof of the shin-building capabilities of that place, and as an ar- 
 gument for the establishment of a dry dock there. To his mind, Mr. T. said, 
 it .proved precisely the reverse of the latter proposition. If such a ship as 
 the Pennsylvania was built without a dry dock, it was the most conclusive 
 proof that one was not necessary for the employment of the ship-building tal- 
 Qat3 of Piiiladelphia. A dry dock is not needed for building ships ; and 
 
surely, when tliere are two wilhin a hundred miles of Philadelphia, another 
 is Hot needed for repairing them. But at Pensacola the case is diflferent, for 
 the slightest injury to a ship on the Southern Atlantic coast, or on the Ciulf, 
 cannot be repaired nearer than Norfolk. This in time of peace ; but, in the 
 event of war, what would be our condition? Why, sir, that, at the very point 
 which must inevitably be the seat of that war, and where our ships must be 
 required, there is no place to repair ihem in fifteen hundred miles. Naval 
 stations for repairing vessels should be located where they are most likely to 
 be injured. Where, for example, are the dry docks of France ] Not at 
 Bordeaux, the great commercial metropolis, but at Brest, Toulon, and Cher- 
 bourg. Where are those oi' England ? Not at Liverpool or London, but at 
 Portsmouth and Chatham. 
 
 In the event of war, at what point would an enemy be most apt to strike? 
 Most certainly at the Gulf of Mexico. If for no other reason, because the 
 possession of the debouche of the Mississippi would give the command of the 
 commerce of five sixths of the Union — more important than the possession of 
 New York and Piiiladelphia both. And where else but in the West Indies (in 
 tliat immediate neighborhood) can any foreign nation congregate their llects 
 previous to an attack? Besides, the immense value of the commerce of 
 those islands makes that the most important theatre of naval conllicts. With 
 a view to these most important considerations, he would say that, cost what 
 it might, Pensacola, or some other point on the Gulf, should bo made an 
 important naval station. If nature had not done all that was necessary, let 
 art assist, at whatever cost. But is such the case ? No, sir : far from it. 
 lie did. not hesitate to say that no place on our whole coast presented such 
 advantages, and that in favor of no single point was there such an accunui- 
 lation of testimony as that which exists as to Ponsacola. A late Secretary 
 of the Navy, Mr. Southard, with that enlarged and enlightened patriotism 
 which has illustrated his whole public life, long since urged this subject upon 
 Congress. He says, in a report to Congress, " The whole country from the 
 Alleghany to the Gulf is interested in the establishment of a naval station at 
 Pensacola. With whatever nation we may be at war, the principal tlieatte 
 will be the Gulf of Mexico, and the object of attack the commerce of the 
 Mississi(ipi." 
 
 The board of engineers, with the undivided authority of that body, say : 
 " Situated as Pensacola is, with respect to the country on either hand, tlw 
 immense regions behind it, its rare properties as a harbor become of inap- 
 preciable value. First. It is accessible to the largest class of sloops and 
 frigates. Second. Its bar is near the coast. Third. It is perfectly land- 
 locked. Fourth. It has excellent facilities for building, repairing, and launch- 
 ing, and for docks and dock yards. Fifth. Abundance of good water. 
 Sixth. It is perfectly defensible." Commodore Dallas says : " The bar is 
 23 feet at low water, and only 27 is required for the largest ships. There 
 will be no difTicuUy in deepening it to any required extent. But to the depth 
 of 7 feet nothing can be more practical)le." Commodore Ridgely uses 
 almost the very same language, to which is added the testimony of Rodgers, 
 B;iinbridgc, Warrington, Kearney, Biddle, Woolsey, Ballard, Clarkson, 
 Slidell — of almost every ofl'icer who has given jjlory to your navy, and ol 
 one ol a very diftt.Tent sort, the illustrious hero of ('iiarleston harbor. Every 
 officer of both the land and the naval service, without one exception, concur 
 in its importance as a station, as well as the perfect practicability of making 
 it one. Why will gentlemen, then, continue to say, Give us information, and 
 
10 
 
 wc will vote the appropriation? Wiiat do they want? What can be added 
 to what we already have ? What else can be furnished ? Do gentlemen, 
 not relying upon the opinion of these able men, skilled in this department, 
 desire the data upon which to judge themselves? Let them look into iho 
 reports of the late Secretary Southard, and of the various naval officers who 
 have been on that station, and they will find them. They will find a bar 
 now 23 feet deep at low water, and, what is of more consequence, a bar that 
 has not changed half an inch in 120 years. By a survey made by the French 
 Government in 1720, the depth is precisely what it now is. A cannon sunk 
 on the bar thirty years ago has been recently found not in the slightest degree 
 imbedded. The bar is now deep enough for all vessels except of the very 
 largest size, and may be, with perfect ease, dredged to any required depth — 
 to 60 feet, if needed. 
 
 The valley of the Mississippi, too, furnishes every single article that is 
 needed in ship-building: iron, copper, lead, zinc, hemp, live-oak, every 
 thing necessary in ship-building ; and, I might add, every thing (in the re- 
 markable language of Talleyrand to Bonaparte, when remonstrating against 
 the cession of Louisiana) that is needed by civilized man. And are we to 
 be told that these materials for ship-building must all be sent round to North- 
 ern navy yards, to be worked up by Northern mechanics ; and not only that, 
 but we are to have no naval station on our whole extended Southern and 
 Gulf coast, no place in time of war for a naval station ; none in less than 
 fifteen hundred miles, where the ships, so absolutely necessary for our pro- 
 tection, may be repaired ? And this, too, is refused us at the very moment 
 that gentlemen ask us to add two more to the dry docks already accessible in 
 the Nortii. That Philadelphia, with two already within a hundred miles, is 
 too remote ; but that fifteen hundred miles is not too far for Southern fleets to 
 be taken for repairs. In 1825, the President was directed to purchase a 
 site, erect buildings, and establish a naval station, at Pensacola. Has any 
 thing effectual, as yet, been done? In 1836, by collecting together a set of 
 the most revolting facts, showing the grossest neglect, not only of Southern 
 but of national interests, I wrung from the House a small appropriation for 
 these great objects ; yet scarcely any of that small appropriation has, as 
 yet, been expended. Am I, sir, (said Mr. T.,) are the people of the South, 
 to be silenced by the miserable excuse that there was some dispute about the 
 tKle to the ground owned by the Government? Why has not that title been 
 quieted by compromise or otherwise? or why has not some new site been 
 selected? If the people of the South and West submit to these things, they 
 deserve no better. Mr. T. did not hold the present head of the Navy De- 
 partment responsible for those things. It would be unjust to charge that 
 gentleman with any want of a just regard to the interests of the South. 
 And, sir, am I to be taken up and lectured here, not only by Northern, but 
 by Southern men too, as involving, improperly, sectional topics, because I 
 allude to these things? I should be recreant to the South and its interests if 
 I forbore to do so from any sickly and mawkish sentimentality, or the poor 
 \anity of making fine sentences about our glorious Union, and that broad 
 [latriotism that looks to the interest of the whole country, disregarding all 
 sectional injustice, however gross. If this be narrow and sectional, be it so. 
 Let gentlemen make the most of it, and pursue, if they choose, a diflcrent 
 course. That they will gain much reputation for a large and enlightened 
 patriotism elsewhere than at home, I do not doubt. Whether they will pro- 
 mote the interests of their constituents oi the cuunliy is another question. I 
 
11 
 
 know the generous and confiJing nature of my friend from Nortli Carolina, 
 (Mr. Stani.y.) Conscious of a superiority to all narrow feelings, he suspects 
 none in others. Let him stay here as long as I have, and I rathei- think he 
 will find these notions going out at the palms of his hands. 
 
 But my friend from New York (Mr. Hofi'man) has fust brought up this 
 topic, and repeats, endorsingly, some remarks at the last session by the gen- 
 tleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Adams.) That distinguished gentleman, in 
 reply to some remarks of mine made two years before as to the inequality of 
 disbursements, with the trick, or rather I should say the skill (as that is more 
 respectful) of a practised dialectitian, relied upon the fact that the largest 
 amount of the public money on deposite was in the Southern States. There 
 was much more of wit than of truth in the views which he presented. What 
 was my position? That much the largest amount of appropriations went 
 North. How does he reply to it ? Why, by showing that whilst on deposite, 
 between the time of collection and disbursement, large sums were found in 
 the South. For example, Alabama paid to the Government, in 1834, about 
 a million and a quarter, and received back in appropriations a quarter of a 
 million, whilst Vermont, which paid $179, received $185,000; Mississippi 
 and Louisiana paid a million each, and each received in appropriations less 
 than $250,000, whilst New Hampshire paid $16,000, and received $334,000. 
 But while this money was in transitu from these Southern States which it 
 depleted to skeletons, to these Northern States, which it fed to repletion and 
 plethora, it did stop a little while in Southern banks, until it could be removed 
 to its ultimate and legitimate home in the North. Our own money abided 
 with us three months, " three little months," and that is made an item of 
 charge against us. 
 
 But, says the gentleman from New York, there is the Florida war, and its 
 large appropriations. Indeed, and has it come to that ? Are we to be 
 charged, as for a sectional purpose, with money expended in defending our 
 wives and cl'.ildrcn from the savage tomahawk? Most beneficent Govern- 
 ment ! most generous and magnanimous people ! who are capable of the un- 
 exampled generosity of appropriating money for these purposes ! Why, sir 
 that is the single benefit that we of the South receive from this connexion • 
 and that is enjoyed in at least an equal degree by the North ; united strength 
 and mutual aid in war ; a great matter, it is true, but not to be put down\s 
 of a sectional character. But, sir, if the gentleman's constituents have 
 given us money to carry on this war, I believe it is all they have given. I 
 have heard of no volunteers from that quarter. I wonder what has become 
 of that gallant regiment of New York, which, on a late memorable occasion 
 tendered its services to General .fackson to go and cut the throats of the 
 nullitiers. 1 remember it well, for T was alarmed no little. It was a great 
 crisis every where, but especially with us ; and when every heart, rightly at- 
 tuned, beat fervently for the peace of the country, and prayed that the bitter 
 cup might pass from us ; when good men and patriots sought more the olive 
 branch than the bayonet ; when that olive branch was magnanimously and 
 generously tendered, and in the same spirit received, this gallant regiment 
 thought only of the spirit-stirring drum, and the strife of battle. What has 
 become of those gallant fellows? Dead, I suppose, sir, all dead; or surely 
 their trenchant blades would have leaped from their scabbards at the first 
 note of this Florida war; all dead, I suppose; killed in foreign wars no 
 doubt ; in Texas, or perhaps in the civil wars of Spain, as it seems to he a 
 civil broil for which they have a special fancv. 
 
t ^ 
 
r^Q^ o 
 
 "oV 
 
 r^ 0* : 
 
 
 
 .■ „,^°-V ^^^°' /°-c ■■'^Sy°^*^ ■:■ 
 
 . -^ 
 
 :- ^j^^ o, 
 
 "• v-?)' 
 
 % '^^0^ r 
 
 
 rr.-' ^0 
 
 
 
 
 
 * ■ay ^ •• 
 
 
 :- -^^o* °< 
 
 " * " \'^ 
 
 
'^^o^ 
 
 r. '^ov^ :i 
 
 '^^o^ 
 
 
 
 ^ ^ ,,^ -.^ -, .— i* %<* A^ ♦A*