roe, Greenleaf's Point, and Harper's Ferry, and were approved by the able and experienced officer at the head of the ordnance department, (Colonel Bomford.) Reports had been made by these boards of officers, among whom were General Eustis, Colonel Crane, and Major Hickman; all of whom, as well as Colonel Bomford, concur in bearing testimony in favor of the rifle.

The board convened at Fortress Monroe stated that, in long ranges of although the rifles were fired with the usual charge of powder, viz: two eighths the weight of their bullet, and the muskets with the increased proportion of two fifths the weight of the ball, the relative execution was found to be in favor of Hall's rifle; that, after having undergone 8,710 discharges, the rifle appeared to be in a fit condition for service, considering the severe proof to which it had been subjected; that it was equal to the service of sixteen active campaigns; and that further proof was considered unnecessary, and was consequently discontinued.

Captain Hall was also the inventor of machinery for the identical construction of the different parts of firearms. He had accomplished what no other mechanic had been able to accomplish in this or any other country-the iden- | tical construction of firearms. This name had been given to the parts of firearms which were all perfectly equal, and made with such uniformity that, after dismounting any number of these guns, and mixing their different parts promiscuously together, we were able, from the confused mass of materials, to form a perfectly fitted arm with the utmost facility, and without regard to the particular stocks from which the mountings had been stripped. As evidence that Captain Hall had accomplished this most desirable object, he referred to a portion of the report of a board of practical armorers, appointed in 1827, to examine the rifle and machinery invented by him. They say:

"In making this examination, our attention was directed, in the first place, for several days, to viewing the operations of the numerous machines which were exhibited to us by the inventor, John H. Hall. Captain Hall has formed and adopted a system in the manufacture of small arms entirely novel, and which, no doubt, may be attended with the most beneficial results to the country, especially if carried into effect on a large scale.

"His machines for this purpose are of several distinct classes, and are used for cutting iron and steel, and for executing wood work, all of which are essentially dif ferent from each other, and differ materially from any other machines we have ever seen in any other establishment.

"Their general merits and demerits, when contrasted with the several machines hitherto in general use for the manufacture of small arms, will, perhaps, be better understood by pointing out the difference of the results produced by them, than by any very accurate description of the machines themselves.

"It is well known, we believe, that arms have never yet been made so exactly similar to each other, by any other process, as to require no marking of their several parts, and so that those parts, on being changed, would suit equally well when applied to every other arm, (of the same kind;) but the machines we have examined effect this with a certainty and precision we should not have believed till we witnessed their operation.

"To determine this point, and test their uniformity beyond all controversy, we requested Colonel Lee, acting superintendent of the United States armory at this place, to send to Hall's armory five boxes, containing 100 rifles manufactured by him in 1824, and which had been in the arsenal [United States arsenal] since that period. We then directed two of his workmen to strip off the work from the stocks of the whole hundred, and also to take to pieces the several parts of the receivers, so call

[SENATE.

ed, and scattered them promiscuously over a long join ers' workbench. One hundred stocks were then brought from Hall's armory, which had been just finished, and on which no work or mounting had ever been put. The workmen then commenced putting the work taken from off the stocks brought from the United States arsenal on the 100 new stocks, the work having been repeatedly mixed and changed by us and the workmen also; all this was done in our presence, and the arms, as fast as they were put together, were handed to us and minutely examined. We were unable to discover any inaccuracy in any of their parts fitting each other, and we are fully persuaded that the parts fitted, after all the changes they must have undergone by the workmen, as well as those made designedly by us in the course of two or three days, with as much accuracy and correctness as they did when on the stocks to which they originally belonged.

"If the uniformity, therefore, in the component parts of small arms is an important desideratum, which, we presume, will not be doubted by any one the least conversant with the subject, it is, in our opinion, completely accomplished by the plan which Captain Hall has carried into effect. By no other process known to us (and we have seen most, if not all, that are in use in the United States) could arms be made so exactly alike as to interchange and require no marks on the different parts; and we very much doubt whether the best workmen that may be selected from any armory, with the aid of the best machines in use elsewhere, could, in a whole life, make a hundred rifles or muskets that would, after being promiscuously mixed together, fit each other with the exact nicety that is to be found in those manufactured by Captain Hall."

An attempt had been made by the Government of France, as early as 1722, to accomplish the identical construction of firearms; but it was abandoned, after expending a large amount in the experiment. The attempt was renewed in 1785; some hundreds of sets were made, but, on being subjected to proof, it was found that the arms were only similar, not identical, and the effort was again abandoned.

Mr. T. said that Captain Hall had spent the best part of a long life in the fabrication of arms, and machinery connected with their manufacture. He had obtained patents for his invention, according to law; and both his rifles and carbines, as well as the machinery for their identical construction, had been introduced and were extensively used in our armory. The bill which had been reported made an appropriation of $20,000, to be paid to Mr. Hall for the right of using his arms and machinery by the United States. A sum equal to this had been paid by an act of the last session to Captain Bell, of the ordnance, for his patent right to his new mode of pointing cannon; and he considered the improvements of Captain Hall as a much more important invention. There had not been a full meeting of the Military Committee when he was instructed to report the bill. sum fixed on was the lowest proposed by any member present. He had no doubt that, if all the facts were understood by the Senate, a larger sum would be voted to Mr. Hall. The statements now on our table sustained this opinion. They could be read, if any Senator wished it. The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. BLACK] said there was some prejudice against Hall's rifle. Mr. T. said that was true. He had himself entertained strong pre judices until the arm had been distributed, and had come into actual service. He was convinced of its durability and usefulness. He had been, as it were, raised with a rifle in bis hand; and, after a careful examination of the one now referred to, he was glad to state his confidence in its importance. The reports of the different boards of skilful officers would, he hoped, convince the Senate.

The

SENATE.]

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. PRESTON] Ob. jected to the second section of the bill, on account of the provision it contained for the employment of Mr. Hall in our armory at Harper's Ferry. Mr. H. was now employed, he believed, under a regulation of the Department. His services had been found indispensable; he had been continually making improvements in the machinery used there. If the bill passed, the Executive was authorized to employ Mr. H. at a salary not exceed ing $2,500, and his services could be dispensed with whenever the President or Congress thought proper. Mr. Hall had been offered double the amount proposed to be given him by the bill, by an agent of a foreign Government, for leave to use in that Government his patent right for his invention; but he had rejected the proposition, and chose to depend on the justice and liberality of

his own Government.

Mr. T. said that it had been his duty, as a member of the Committee on Military Affairs, to bring this subject before the Senate. He had done so in a manner that would, he believed, give the members a proper understanding of the case. If, however, further information was called for, the rest of the report could be read. He felt, personally, no solicitude on the subject. He knew that other arms, more recently invented, had been presented at the War Department, and that a board had been directed to examine and prove them. But that board was unable to prosecute that duty satisfactorily during the cold weather of last month. A report need not be expected before we adjourn; and he would be content should the Senate postpone the decision of this case until the next session, or determine upon it at this time. He could not doubt that the inventor of this valuable and useful improvement would one day be amply compensated by our Government.

Mr. PRESTON also explained; but observed that various discoveries had been made since the rifle of Captain Hall, which might possibly supersede it. To settle this point, a series of experiments had been instituted, and were proceeding at this time. He doubted the propriety of passing the bill in the mean time. He admitted the merit of that part of Captain Hall's invention by which the various parts of a musket were made so uniformly that they might promiscuously be taken, and at once be put together, and would fit perfectly.

Mr. TIPTON further explained, and vindicated the provisions of the bill. It was not imperative, but only permitted the Executive to employ his services as long as they might be needed, at a salary not exceeding $2,500 a year.

Mr. LINN testified, from the result of experience on the Western frontier, to the merits of this rifle, of which he spoke in high terms.

Mr. BLACK moved to lay the bill on the table; which motion prevailed, and the bill was laid on the table accordingly.

COLONEL ARBUCKLE.

The bill for the relief of Colonel Matthew Arbuckle, of the United States army, having reference to certain land claims in Louisiana, was considered as in Committee of the Whole, and explanations of it, involving various legal considerations, were given by Mr. SEVIER in its favor, and by Messrs. PRESTON, BLACK, BUCHANAN, and FULTON, in opposition.

On motion of Mr. BUCHANAN, the bill was amended by requiring Colonel Arbuckle to pay $125 per acre to the United States for the lands in question, on his acceptance of the bill: Ayes 16, noes 11.

A motion to lay the bill on the table was negatived, by yeas 16, nays 17. And having been further amended, it was lost, on the question of its engrossment, by year 16, nays 16.

[FEB. 28, 1837.

After the consideration of several other bills, The Senate adjourned.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 28.

INAUGURATION OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNI

TED STATES.

The PRESIDENT pro. tem. presented a letter from the President elect of the United States, informing the Senate that he would be ready to take the usual oath of office on Saturday, March 4, at 12 o'clock, noon, at such place and in such manner as the Senate might designate.

Mr. GRUNDY offered a resolution for the appointment of a committee of arrangements, to make the requisite preparations for administering the oath to the President elect of the United States.

He was

Mr. CLAY said he would like to inquire whether precedents had been examined on this subject. aware that the Senate had always had a peculiar agency in this business; but he was not aware why the Senate should act upon it any more than the House, or why it was not a joint concern. He remembered that, on the first election of Mr. Monroe, the committee of the Senate applied to him, as Speaker of the House, for the use of the chamber of the House; and he had told them that he would put the chamber in order for the use of the Senate, but the control of it he did not feel authorized to surrender. They wished also to bring in the fine red chairs of the Senate, but he told them it could not be done; the plain democratic chairs of the House were more becoming. The consequence was, that Mr. Monroe, instead of taking the oath within doors, took it outside, in the open air, in front of the Capitol. Mr. C. mentioned this for the purpose of making the inquiry, what was the practice, and on what it was founded, and why the Senate had the exclusive care of administering the oath.

Mr. GRUNDY said the committee had found no authority but several precedents, which were in strict accordance with the proposition now proposed to be made. He did not recollect any instance in which the House had participated in it; and, in fact, the House, as such, had no existence, their term having expired on the preceding day. The committee had examined three cases of more modern date, and had found nothing in opposition to the practice proposed. If the committee could not get into the House, they could go out of doors.

The resolution was adopted, and the Chair was authorized to appoint the above-named committee of three members.

THE DISTRIBUTION QUESTION.

The Senate, proceeded to the consideration of the fortification bill; and the question being on the amend ment reported by the Committee on Finance, viz: to strike out the second section of the bill, which contains the provision for the distribution among the States of any surplus which may remain in the Treasury on the 1st of January, 1838

Mr. CALHOUN regretted that the committee had not made a written report on so important a recommendation.

Mr. WRIGHT explained that the second section of the bill being neither more nor less than the bill formerly introduced by the Senator from South Carolina himself, the case was fully understood by all the Senate, and needed no consumption of time to explain it. As to a written report, there had been no time to prepare one, even had the committee deemed it necessary.

Mr. CALHOUN reminded the Senate of the triumphant majority by which the deposite bill had been adopted at the last session; and as there had occurred nothing

since then to change the principle of the measure in any respect, he was content to rest the present question on the principles then so unanswerably established, and the discussion by which they had been defended at the last session.

Mr. WRIGHT said that the principles which had gov erned his course last year did remain unchanged, and should govern it now. As to others, he presumed their votes last session had been governed mainly by the fact that a large surplus was actually in existence, and must be disposed of in some way. Such was not now the fact; and if any gentlemen should change their course, it was for them and not for Mr. W. to give the reasons for such change.

Mr. CLAY inquired whether it was the intention of the chairman of the Finance Committee and those with whom he acted, that if a surplus arose it was to be left in the hands of the deposite banks, where it drew an interest of two per cent., while in the hands of the States it would yield six. He was anxious to know what was to be the policy of the administration in regard to this

matter.

[Mr. WRIGHT interposed, to say that its policy would be to have no surplus.]

Then (replied Mr. C.) take the land bill, like an honest man, and there is a perfect remedy for the difficulty. Mr. C. then adverted to the remarks made by Mr. RIVES, in the discussion of the expunging resolution, as to the democratic character of the Senate, and appealed to the body now to show whether it would justify this character by opposing a measure coming to it from the confesesdly democratic branch of the Government. called upon all who had voted for the distribution bill of the last session to rally round their own principles, and oppose the striking out. But, by way of compromise, he proposed the adoption of the land bill, &c. He concluded by demanding the yeas and nays.

He

Mr. BUCHANAN said he was one of those who intended to vote against the amendment to the fortification bill which had been adopted in the House, directing that the surplus revenue exceeding five millions of dollars which might remain in the Treasury on the first day of January next, should be deposited with the States, under the provisions of the deposite act which had passed at the last session of Congress. As he had advocated the passage of that act, it became necessary that he should make a few observations explanatory of the course which he purposed to pursue on the present occasion.

Mr. B. stated that there was but little analogy between these two measures, unless it might be that they were both called deposite bills. This was the chief point of resemblance. The principles upon which the present proposition was now advocated were entirely different from those which had been assumed by the friends of the deposite bill of the last session. And here he must be permitted to express his regret that the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY] seemed to have abandoned his bill to distribute the proceeds of the public lands among the States. For his own part, he infinitely preferred that measure to the one now before the Senate.

What were the principles (said Mr. B.) upon which the deposite bill of the last session rested? There was then a vast sum of public money, beyond the wants of the Government, in the deposite banks, whilst an absolute certainty existed that at the end of the year this surplus would be greatly increased. At that time, these banks were not bound to pay any interest on their deposites. These accumulations of public money were loaned out by them to individuals, whilst all the profits arising from such loans went into the pockets of their stockholders. A wild spirit of speculation was thus fostered, which threatened to destroy the regular business of the country, and to convert our public domain into paper VOL. XIII.-63

[SENATE.

money. The enormous evils of this system were palpable. The banks were then inflicting deep injuries upon the country, by the manner in which they used this money; and it was every day becoming more and more uncertain whether they would be able to meet the demands of the Government, when called upon for this purpose.

Under these peculiar circumstances, what was to be done? We were compelled to choose between two great evils. We must either have suffered the money to remain in the banks, and subjected the country to the consequences; or it became our duty to deposite it with the States, and give them the advantage of using it until it should be required by the wants of the Government. No other practical alternative could be presented. For my own part, I felt no hesitation in making my choice.

At that time it seemed to have been admitted by every Senator, that, as a general system, it would be extremely dangerous to the country annually to distribute the surplus in the Treasury among the States. No voice was raised in favor of such a principle. It was universally condemned. As a plan of general policy, a worse one can never be devised. If pursued, it must, in a very few years, destroy the character of this Government. Let it once be established, and all men can see the inevitable consequences. Every Senator and every Representative will then come to Congress with strong feelings directly hostile to the best interests of the Federal Government. Instead of having our eyes exclusively fixed upon those great national objects intrusted to our care by the constitution, we would be more or less than men if we could banish from our minds the consideration that the full amount of every appropriation for such purposes would be so much deducted from the surplus to which our respective States would be entitled at the close of the year. The question will then be not merely what appropriations are necessary to promote the general interest of the country, but blended with this question will be another--how much can be withheld from those purposes, and to what extent can the dividend of our own States be thus increased? For example: a proposed fortification will cost half a million; in voting for or against it, the consideration will necessarily obtrude itself, would it not be better, would it not be productive of more good, to distribute this sum among our own States? In peace, it is our duty to prepare for war. With this view, a proposition is made to increase our navy. This may be necessary to protect our commerce, and to present such an array of our power to foreign nations, that they will not dare to injure our citizens, or to insult our flag upon the ocean. In voting upon such a proposition, how easily may we delude ourselves with the idea that there is no danger, and that the country will derive more real benefit from expending the necessary amount upon railroads and canals in the respective States. Every dollar which can be withdrawn from the General Government is a dollar given to the States. Establish this policy, and you set up a principle, to use a Senatorial word, antagonistical to the constitutional and efficient exercise of the powers of the Federal Government. You will thus paralyze the energies of this Government, and reduce it to almost the same feeble condition in which it was placed under the old articles of confederation. Can the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] deny, has he denied, that this would be the effect of such a sys. tem? Under its operation, will it not always be a question how much will this or will that appropriation for national purposes deduct from State dividends? You thus present to the very agents selected to administer the Federal Government the strongest temptations to violate their duty.

The deposite bill of the last session was advocated upon the principle that it was to be a single operation, and