Tennessee, John Russell, Peter Sailly, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Martin G. Schuneman, James Sloan, John Smilie, John Smith, Samuel Smith, Henry Southard, Joseph Stanton, David Thomas, Philip R. Thompson, Uri Tracy, Abram Trigg, Joseph B. Varnum, John Whitehill, Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, Nathan Williams, Richard Winn, and Joseph Winston.

NAYS-Burwell B`ssett, Samuel W. Dana, William Ely, Joseph Lewis, jun., Jonathan O. Mosely, Jeremiah Nelson, Josiah Quincy, and Killian K. Van Rensselaer.

The second member of the said motion being again read in the words following, to wit:

"That the said memorials appear to have been presented at a time, and under circumstances insidiously calculated to excite unjust suspicion in the minds of the good people of this nation, against the existing

Administration of the General Government."

The question was taken that the House do agree to the said second member of the motion, and resolved in the affirmative-yeas 70, nays 13, as follows:

YEAS-Evan Alexander, Willis Alston, jun., Isaac Anderson, David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, George M. Bedinger, Barnabas Bidwell, John Blake, jun., Robert Brown, Levi Casey, John Chandler, John Claiborne, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Frederick Conrad, Leonard Covington, Jacob Crowninshield, Richard Cutts, Ezra Darby, Elias Earle, Peter Early, James Elliot, Ebenezer Elmer, William Findley, James Fisk, John Fowler, Andrew Gregg, Isaiah L. Green, Silas Halsey, John Hamilton, David Holmes, John G. Jackson, Walter Jones, John Lambert, Matthew Lyon, Patrick Magruder, Robert Marion, Josiah Masters, William McCreery, Nicholas R. Moore, Thomas Moore, John Morrow, Gurdon S. Mumford, Thomas Newton, jun., Gideon Olin, John Pugh, Thomas M. Randolph, John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, John Russell, Peter Sailly, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Martin G. Schuneman, James Sloan, John Smilie, John Smith, Samuel Smith, Henry Southard, Joseph Stanton, David Thomas, Uri Tracy, Joseph B. Varnum, John Whitehill, Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, Nathan Williams, Richard Winn, and Joseph Winston. NAYS-Christopher Clark, Samuel W. Dana, William Ely, James M. Garnett, Joseph Lewis, jun., Jonathan O. Mosely, Jeremiah Nelson, Timothy Pitkin, jun., Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, Philip R. Thompson, Abram Trigg, and Killian K. Van Rensselaer. The third member of the said motion being again read, in the words following, to wit:

"And that it would be highly improper in this House, to take any step which might influence or prejudice a cause now depending in a legal tribunal of the United

States."

The question was taken that the House do agree to said third member of the motion, and unanimously resolved in the affirmative, by yeas and nays, every member present voting in the affirmative, to wit:

Evan Alexander, Willis Alston, jun., Isaac Anderson, David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, George M. Bedinger, Barnabas Bidwell, John Blake, jun., Robert Brown, Levi Casey, John Chandler, John Claiborne, Christopher Clark, Matthew Clay, John

H. OF R.

Clopton, Frederick Conrad, Leonard Covington, Jacob Crowninshield, Richard Cutts, Samuel W. Dana, Ezra Darby, Elias Earle, Peter Early, James Elliot, Ebenezer Elmer, William Ely, William Findley, James Fisk, John Fowler, James M. Garnett, Andrew Gregg, Isaiah L. Green, Silas Halsey, John Hamilton, David Holmes, John G. Jackson, Walter Jones, John Lambert, Joseph Lewis, jun., Matthew Lyon, Patrick Magruder, Robert Marion, Josiah Masters, William McCreery, Nicholas R. Moore, Thomas Moore, John Morrow, Jonathan O. Mosely, Gurdon S. Mumford, Jeremiah Nelson, Thomas Newton, jun., Gideon Olin, Timothy Pitkin, jun., John Pugh, Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, John Russell, Peter Sailly, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Martin G. Schuneman, James Sloan, John Smi lie, John Smith, Samuel Smith, Henry Southard, Joseph Stanton, Samuel Tenney, David Thomas, Philip R. Thompson, Uri Tracy, Abram Trigg, Killian K. Van Rensselaer, Joseph B. Varnum, John Whitehill, Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, Richard Winn, and Joseph Winston.

The fourth and last member of the said motion being again read, in the words following, to wit: "Therefore, Resolved, That the said memorials be, by the Clerk of this House, returned to those from whom they came:"

The question was taken that the House do agree to the said fourth and last member of the motion, and resolved in the affirmative-yeas 71, nays 14, as follows:

YEAS-Evan Alexander, Willis Alston, jun., Isaac Anderson, David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Bassett, Barnabas Bidwell, John Blake, junior, Robert Brown, Levi Casey, John Chandler, John Claiborne, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Frederick Conrad, Leonard Covington, Jacob Crowninshield, Richard Cutts, Ezra Darby, John Dawson, Elias Earle, Peter Early, James Elliot, Ebenezer Elmer, John W. Eppes, William Findley, James Fisk, John Fowler, James M. Garnett, Andrew Gregg, Isaiah L. Green, Silas Halsey, John Hamilton, David Holmes, John G. Jackson, John Lambert, Matthew Lyon, Patrick Magruder, Robert Marion, Josiah Masters, William McCreery, Nicholas R. Moore, Thomas Moore, John Morrow, Gurdon S. Mumford, Thomas Newton, jun., Gideon Olin, John Pugh, Thomas M. Randolph, John Rea of Pennsylvania, John Rhea of Tennessee, Peter Sailly, Thomas Sammons, Thomas Sandford, Martin G. Schuneman, James Sloan, John Smilie, John Smith, Samuel Smith, Henry Southard, Joseph Stanton, David Thomas, Philip R. Thompson, Uri Tracy, Joseph B. Varnum, John Whitehill, Robert Whitehill, David R. Williams, Na than Williams, Richard Winn, and Joseph Winston.

NAYS-George M. Bedinger, Christopher Clark, Samuel W. Dana, William Ely, Joseph Lewis, jun., Jeremiah Nelson, Timothy Pitkin, jun., Josiah Quincy, John Randolph, John Russell, Samuel Thompson, Thomas W. Thompson, Abram Trigg, and Killian K. Van Rensselaer.

DUTIES ON SALT.

The House took up the amendments of the Senate to the bill repealing the acts laying duties on salt, and continuing in force for a further time, the first section of the act, entitled "An act further to protect the commerce and seamen of the United States against the Barbary Powers."

Senate. I hope we shall not concur with the Senate, under the idea of reducing the duty on salt from twenty to twelve cents. Notwithstanding a fear entertained by some gentlemen of a deficiency in the revenue, the House, by a vast majority, passed the bill repealing the duty on salt. The Message of the President was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means, and that Committee made a report recommending the taking off the duty on salt, and continuing the two and a half per cent. duty. Every objection to the measure that now exists then existed, and ought then to have been offered. We then sent to the other House a supply of money-a tax yielding $900,000, with the probability of its amounting the ensuing year to a million; in this same bill we proposed taking off a tax, which does not yield $600,000; we therefore made a grant of $400,000 annually. It is said that the amendment of the Senate does not go to the imposition of a new tax, but that it continues the revenue as it is. There is some plausibility, but no solidity in this remark. If it goes to continue the revenue as it now is, where is the necessity of continuing the duty of two and a half per cent.? It is therefore in fact a new money bill. Let me urge one thing to the House. If we ever mean to strike off the duty on salt, we must cling to the Mediterranean fund as the lever to lift this load from the shoulders of the people. It will be recollected that within five years we have taken off the internal taxes. I am glad of it; for I fear it would not now be done. They produced about $800,000, inclusive of the taxes which have expired, and $640,000 exclusive of them. But we have granted a supply of two and a half per cent. duties, which yield annually, from nine hundred thousand, to a million dollars. This is a complete offset to the repeal of the internal taxes. What we have lost by their repeal we have gained, with the addition of one or two hundred thousand dollars beyond the sum we should have received, had they been suffered to remain, and no addition been made to the duties on imports and tonnage; and yet we hear of the growing demands of the Government. But the growing demands of all Governments are alike. Do gentlemen recollect the growing state of the nation? When this Government was first put in motion, the duties on imports were not more than four or five millions. These resources are daily growing, and a fund accruing from the increasing prosperity of the people, which their guardians are bound to account for. Though we have contracted a debt for New Orleans, we have gained a revenue of not less than $300,000 a year. From these circumstances I hope we shall adhere to our disagreement to the amendments of the Senate, and that they will, in their justness and graciousness, yield a tax of half a million for a tax which produces a whole million. It is a new stretch of Senatorial prerogative, for that body

The SPEAKER said the House had nothing to do with the conduct of the Senate-it was therefore out of order to make such remarks.

Mr. J. RANDOLPH.—I would wish to have nothing to do with the Senate; and am therefore in

H. OF R.

favor of adhering to our vote-though I believe, when there is a Constitutional question as to the powers of the two branches, we may very properly examine their proceedings. It is said the Senate may strike out all but the title of your bills. Indisputably; but will this House submit? Suppose you send a bill to the Senate laying a duty of two per cent. on saltpetre, and they send it back to you, striking out this provision, and giving you a bill in lieu of it, laying a tax of four shillings in the pound on all the lands of the United States. Is that, under the Constitution, a fair exercise of their power? To my mind, if the position be admitted, that it is the sole privilege of this House to grant the public money, it is extremely indecent, to say no more, for that branch of the Legislature to tell the United States they will get all the money they can, whatever may be the disposition of this House. Recollect how the salt tax was laid before on the last day of an expiring Congress, after a proposition to lay the tax had been rejected, and members had gone home, under the persuasion that no such attempt would be renewed. By some little modification of that proposition, a tax of twenty cents was laid on every fifty-six pounds of salt, and riveted on the people forever. When I say forever, I mean the period of its being taken off depends on a branch of the Legislature, over which the people have but little control, who are the representatives, not of the people, but of the State sovereignties. Now, if the House do wish, as surely they must, to get rid of this tax, and if they believe, as they must, that the present circumstances of the country admit of its repeal, else the bill would not have passed by so large a majority, I hope they will adhere to their disagreement to the amendments of the Senate, and put it in the power of the other branch to take so much of the public money, as it is our pleasure to grant, and not one cent more.

Mr. RHEA, of Tennessee. As I do not appear to have been understood, it is necessary that I should say a few words in explanation. I said nothing of the Mediterranean fund. I said then, and I still say, I do not contemplate this bill, so far as it relates to imposing a duty on salt, as a money bill; and I consider the amendment of the Senate as only a negation to the repeal of laws affecting the revenue. I said that House had a right to judge of the propriety of a repeal of a revenue law, and I say so still. We say we are in favor of a repeal of the law imposing a duty on salt-they say they are against it. What has that to do with originating a money bill? One is as distinct from the other as the effect from its cause. I agree that this House has the right to originate revenue laws; but, once enacted, they have an equal right with us to judge of the expediency of rescinding them. With regard to this law, when I came here, I found it in existence, and I think in the present state of the country it ought to be continued. Have we not every reason to believe that we shall be embroiled in a war with Tunis? Will not this take all the revenue we have to spare? I shall be glad if it will not take more. We have no information from the Executive

Government, that this duty can be dispensed with. We have seen no report on the subject from the Secretary of the Treasury. It is not my duty to sit here and disarm the Government of the power of promoting the public interest. You may go on repealing one law after another, until the Executive has but the mere name of authority left. It has been said that the demands on the Treasury may increase-I believe they may justly increase; we know indeed they have increased. Since the meeting of Congress we have taken measures which may increase them for eventual good, for the benefit of the whole community. Being of this opinion, I must vote against this bill in every shape in which it comes before me.

Mr. J. RANDOLPH.-I understand that if the House do adhere, all conference with the Senate will be at an end. If they prefere to keep the duty on salt to having the Mediterranean fund, they will refuse to recede from their amendments. But I have no idea they will refuse a revenue of a million for half a million. I am as anxious as any man to vote the necessary supplies of the Government, and perhaps my vote might have been materially influenced, had a different vote prevailed on the bill relative to the public debt, which has been postponed. But when I find the hands of the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund tied, and that there is a probability that they will be obliged to pour back into the Treasury, a part of the fund vested in them, I feel altogether indisposed to this amendment. If all the surplus revenue could be applied to the discharge of the debt, I might be as liberal as any man in granting it; but as it cannot, I am for adhering to our vote.

Mr. CONRAD. I hope we shall adhere, but try a conference. It will then be time enough to consider whether we will adhere. Anxious as I am to get rid of this odious tax, I will agree to reduce the duty to 12 cents, or keep the Mediterranean fund, and next session judge whether we are able to take off the whole of it.

Mr. RHEA, of Tennessee, said he barely rose to set the gentleman from Virginia right, by stating that the hands of the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund would not be tied for several years to come, and that Congress would be in session before any such great sum would be accumulated in their hands.

Mr. LYON said he felt as great an aversion to the salt tax as any other man, but his strong wish was to act in such a manner that the Executive Government might not be distressed in discharging the duties devolved on it by the Legislature. He should vote against adhering, that a conference might be had with the Senate. He should vote for taking off the salt tax, if he thought the Government could do without it; and he had no doubt that most of the gentlemen were under the impression that the Secretary of the Treasury thought we could do without it. He said, for his own satisfaction, he had applied to the Secretary of the Treasury, who had told him the Government could not do without it.

APRIL, 1806.

insist on their disagreement to the amendment of the Senate, and appointed a committee of confer

ence.

And then, on a motion, made and seconded, the House adjourned until half past six o'clock, post meridiem.

Eodem Die, half past 6 o'clock.

A message from the Senate informed the House that the Senate have agreed to the conference desired by this House on the subject-matter of the amendment depending between the two Houses to the bill, entitled "An act in addition to an act, entitled 'An act supplementary to the act providing for a Naval Peace Establishment, and for other purposes," and have appointed managers at the same on their part. The Senate have appointed a committee on their part, jointly, with such committee as may be appointed on the part of this House, to wait on the President of the United States, and notify him of the proposed recess of Congress.

The House proceeded to consider so much of the aforegoing message of the Senate as relates to the appointment of a joint committee of the two Houses to wait on the President of the United States, and notify him of the proposed recess of Congress: Whereupon,

Resolved, That this House doth agree to the same; and that Mr. EARLY, Mr. THOMAS M.RANDOLPH, and Mr. CUTTS, be appointed of the said committee, on the part of this House.

The House proceeded to consider the amendment proposed by the Senate to the bill, entitled "An act to amend, in the cases therein mentioned, the act to regulate the collection of duties on imports and tonnage:" Whereupon.

Resolved, That this House doth agree to the said amendment.

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill sent from the Senate, entitled "An act for the punishment of counterfeiting the current coin of the United States, and for other purposes. The bill was reported without amendment.

The House proceeded to consider the said bill at the Clerk's table: Whereupon, the bill was read the third time, and passed.

The House proceeded to consider the amendment proposed by the Senate to the bill entitled "An act respecting the claims to land in the Indiana Territory and State of Ohio:" Whereupon, Resolved, That this House doth agree to the said amendment.

The House resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the bill sent from the Senate, entitled "An act for the regulation of the times of holding the Courts of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. The bill was reported without amendment.

The House proceeded to consider the said bill at the Clerk's table: Whereupon, the bill was read the third time and passed.