they derived all the benefits to which a road can be applied which is constructed for the public use and for the public benefit.

A word now with respect to the practicability of making the road through the State of Illinois. I do not know that there are many senators here who were here in 1836 and 1838. So rapidly do we pass off the stage that a very few years make a great difference in the dramatis personœ. But I am sure that if there be any here who were here in '36 and '38, they will recollect that the idea of making a paved road through the State of Illinois was abandoned because of the enormity of the expense of making it, the materials not being at hand, and having to be drawn from such an immense distance. I recollect distinctly, though I have not recently referred to the documents, that upon that occasion it was made known to us that gravel and stone had been hauled thirteen miles in order to place it on the road, and it was seen that a debt of the most enormous magnitude must be contracted, if the road, under such extraordinary expenses, was paved, graveled, or macadamized. Hence Congress only contemplated to make a road that was not macadamized through the State of Illinois.

Mr. President, I fear I am consuming more of the time of the Senate than I ought to on this bill. It comes at last to the question which I have stated. Missouri has had the application of the two per cent. fund to more than three times its amount, even if you limit her liability to that only expended in the State of Illinois, and there is no money out of which she can be paid. That two per centum was positively and expressly pledged to the reimbursement of the expenditure which the general gov ernment had made, but that reimbursement has not yet been effected, and, until it is effected, Missouri has no claim upon the government. It was said in the report of the committee that in the case of the eight other States with which similar stipulations had been made by compact at the time of their admission into the Union, those States had the two per centum refunded to them. I answered that the other day. I repeat the answer now. In no one instance of those eight States had there been any expenditure of a single dollar to make a road leading to any one of them; the money, therefore, was in the treasury unapplied, and was surrendered to the several States because it had not been expended. The difference between them and Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio-no one of which but Missouri has ventured to ask the payment of the two per cent. fund— is, that in the case of the eight States the fund was unexpended and unexhausted, while in the case of these four States the fund was positively pledged to the reimbursement of the general government. The general government has not yet been reimbursed, and the question is whether without being reimbursed we should pay this fund to any one of those States.

And now a word in relation to the act of 1841, to which the senator referred; and with respect to the stipulation of it with regard to the two per cent. fund of Alabama and Mississippi. It will be recollected that in that case the fund was in the treasury; that it was to have been expended for

the common benefit of the Union and of those States; that it was to have been expended to make roads, not within them, but leading to them. It was a fund, therefore, in the application of which the whole Union, as well as those two States, was interested. When, therefore, there was a proposition made to surrender the fund, the general government had a right to propose the terms on which the surrender should be made, and had a right to say, "If we give up to you this money, if we relinquish the interest we have in the making of roads leading to you, we have a right to stipulate for another mode of applying it, which may produce benefit to the Union at large." Now, how is it with respect to the case as put by the senator from Missouri? Missouri comes here as a creditor claiming that we are her debtor. She demands the money as a matter of right. Here is an inexorable demand, and she demands that her debtor pay her forthwith. I said, the other day, and I repeat now, that if the money be due, if we stand in the relation of a debtor to Missouri, we have no right to enter into a stipulation with our creditor and say how the money we pay our creditor should be applied.

Sir, if it be the pleasure of the Senate to hear more on this subject; if it be their judgment as to propriety to suffer a bill again to be introduced. which was decided after fair and full argument by a majority of almost two to one I believe; if it be the desire of the Senate that of the fourteen remaining working days of the session we should devote another to the discussion of the bill, leave being granted to introduce it, and it being assigned for debate on another day; if we think we can devote another one of those fourteen precious days to the subject, and if there is a prospect also of the House of Representatives being so little burdened with business that they can, under the operation of the two thirds rule, take up this bill and pass it, then leave to introduce the bill should be granted, and a day set aside for its consideration and discussion.

[The question was then put on granting leave to Mr. Benton to introduce his bill, and was negatived by a vote of thirty-one to thirteen.]

ON VIOLATIONS OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE LAW.

IN SENATE, FEBRUARY 21 & 24, 1851.

[A MESSAGE was received from the President of the United States, the opening of which is as follows:

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, February 19, 1851.

To the Senate of the United States:

I have received the resolution of the Senate of the 18th instant, requesting me to lay before that body, if not incompatible with the public interest, any information I may possess in regard to an alledged recent case of a forcible resistance to the execution of the laws of the United States in the city of Boston, and to communicate to the Senate, under the above conditions, what means I have adopted to meet the occurrence; and whether, in my opinion, any additional legislation is necessary to meet the exigency of the case, and to more vigorously execute existing laws.

The president, in a message of considerable length, replied in detail to the points made in the communication from the Senate, after the reading of which, Mr. Clay spoke as follows.]

I HAVE listened with great satisfaction to the reading of this message of the president. Its general tone and firm resolution announce that he will carry into effect the execution of the laws of the United States. It ought to be, and I trust will be, satisfactory to every impartial and candid man in the whole community. There is only one regret, if I were to express any, that I feel. I think the marshal of Massachusetts ought to be dismissed, and I have very little doubt, although not authorized to say any thing upon the subject, that the president is subjecting his conduct to that scrutiny which will enable him to come to a satisfactory conclusion as to the point of duty whether he should or should not dismiss him. I intend, after a few remarks, to make a motion with respect to this message.

I avail myself of the occasion to express the high degree of satisfaction which I have felt in seeing the general and faithful execution of this law. It has been executed in Indiana under circumstances really of great embarrassment, doubt, and difficulty. It has been executed in Ohio, in repeated instances-in Cincinnati. It has been executed in the State of Pennsylvania, at the seat of government of the State, and at the great

commercial metropolis of the State. It has been executed in the great metropolis of the Union-New York-I believe upon more than one occasion. It has been executed everywhere except in the city of Boston, and there has been a failure there upon two occasions to execute the law. I confess, sir, that when I heard of the first failure, I was most anxious to hear of the case of another arrest of a fugitive slave in Boston, that the experiment might be again made, and that it might be satisfactorily ascertained whether the law could or could not be executed in the city of Boston. Therefore, with profound surprise and regret, I heard of the recent occurrence, in which the law had been again treated with contempt, and the court-house of the country violated by an invasion of a lawless force. Sir, I stated upon a former occasion, that the mob consisted chiefly, as is now stated by the president, of blacks. But, when I adverted to that fact, I had in my mind those, wherever they may be, in high or low places, in public or private, who instigated, incited, and stimulated to these deeds of enormity, those poor black, deluded mortals. They are the persons who ought to be reached; they are the persons who ought to be brought to condign punishment; and I trust, if there be any incompetency in existing laws to punish those who advised, and stimulated, and instigated those unfortunate blacks to these deeds of lawless enormity, that the defects will be supplied, and the really guilty party who lurks behind, putting forward these miserable wretches, will be brought to justice. I believe at least 1 hope the existing laws will be found competent to reach their case.

Mr. President, in the message which has just been read, the president has suggested two or three doubts or defects in existing laws. The act of 1795 presupposes the existence and continued action of an insurrection, and, consequently, the existence and combination of insurgents who carry on that insurrection. The act, therefore, requires that before there shall be any application of force to quell the insurrection, there shall be a proclamation announced and read to the community and insurgents, commanding them to disperse, and then, if they fail to disperse, the application of force shall compel that to be done which the parties would not do without it. But it is manifest that in such a case as that which has recently occurred in Boston this act can not be carried out, because there is no preexisting insurrection. There are no known insurgents. The first evidence of opposition and obstruction to the law arises from the fact that a party suddenly burst into the court-house, dispersed the officers, violated the sanctuary of justice, and committed those enormities of which we have recently heard. To make a proclamation beforehand is therefore impossible. The president suggests, among the legal remedies which these cases may call for, that of dispensing with the proclamation in such cases. There is some doubt, under the act of March, 1787, whether the army and navy authorized to be employed to enforce the laws of the United States can be employed without prior proclamation, as is required in case of an insurrection. That, also, is a subject worthy of consideration.

My motion then is, that this message and an accompanying document be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and that that committee be instructed to report, with all convenient dispatch, upon the recommendations contained in the message. I will also move, at a proper time, for its printing, and the printing of an extra number of copies.

The course of the senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Hale] does not surprise me; it is perfectly in keeping and congenial with his general course upon subjects of this kind. He pronounces a deliberate act of the executive of the country, our common chief magistrate, as ridiculous. Now, sir, that is matter of opinion, and being matter of opinion, it depends upon the opinion others may entertain of the person who expresses it. But the senator will allow me to say that upon a subject of that kind, and upon rhetorical subjects to which he has alluded, there are two standards of opinion prevailing; one, that of the member himself; and the other, that of the body of which he is a member. And if he will allow me to tell him, the appreciation made by a member of his own capacity for debate and readiness in it may be much higher than will be shared in by other members of this body.

MR. HALE. That is a matter of opinion.

Mr. CLAY. And I put my opinion against yours. But I must take occasion to say that on scarcely any occasion have I risen to speak in this body when the senator has not followed me, as if his great object was to compete with me the palm of elocution. I yield to the senator. I know the self-complacency with which he generally rises, and I hope he will receive this surrender on my part of any ambition between him and me to contend for the palm of oratory, with the complacency with which he usually rises in this body and presents himself before us. [Laughter.]

Now, what is the aim of the senator? To consider this mob, this negro mob as an isolated affair, as an affair of the two or three hundred negroes only, who assembled on that occasion, and violated and outraged the laws of their country. Is there any other man in the Senate who believes that it originated among these negroes? Do we not all know the ramified means which are employed by the abolitionists openly, by word and by print everywhere, to stimulate these negroes to acts of violence, recommending them to arm themselves, and to slay, murder, and kill any body in pursuit of them, in order to recover and call them back to the duty and service from which they had escaped?

The proclamation is not aimed solely at the miserable negroes, stimulated, no doubt, by those outside of the court-house; who laid all the plans, and some of whom, one at least, was at the door beckoning to the negroes to come in-I beg pardon, a white negro standing at the door beckoning to the negroes to come in. Does not everybody know that it is not the work of those miserable wretches, who are without the knowledge and without a perfect consciousness of what became them or what was their duty? They are urged on and stimulated by speeches, some of which are made on this