25th CONG....1st SESS.

for passing to the third reading the bill to postpone the pa y ment of the fourth instalment of the deposite with the States, prescribed by the act of 23d June, 1836, is to be taken in connection with his subsequent speech, on the 14th of October, on the bill to adjust the balances remaining due from the late deposite banks, to be found at p. 265. The postponement bill, as it had passed the Senate, postponed the payment of the fourth instalment "till further provision by law." Mr. PICKENS, in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, had moved to strike out the words "further provision by law," and insert "the first day of January, 1839;" to which Mr. ADAMS had moved, as a further amendment, to add the following: "And all balances of public moneys due from all the deposite banks are hereby appropriated to the said payment, and no part of them shall be applied to any other payment whatever; and if the portion of the said balances due by the said deposite banks cannot be received in time to pay the whole of the said deposite with the States, hereby made payable on the first of January, 1839, then the instalment of debt from the late Bank of the United States, for the stock in that institution held by the United States, payable in October, 1833, is hereby appropriated, to make up any insufficiency of the sums recovered from the deposite banks to complete the said payment of the fourth instalment of the deposite with the States."

Both these amendments had been, by small majorities, rejected in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, and the bill had been reported, without amendment, to the House, where they had been excluded from consideration by a successful call from Mr. CUSHMAN, of New Hampshire, for the previous question.

The bill having thus passed to the third reading by the vote of Mr. PICKENS, who immediately moved the reconsideration, and the next moining supported the motion by a speech, it was on this motion for reconsideration that the following remarks were addressed to the House.]

Mr. ADAMS expressed the hope that it was competent for him, at that stage of the proceedings, to debate the amendment he had introduced in Committee of the Whole, but which had been cut off by the previous question.

The SPEAKER remarked that there was no amendment now before the House, the motion of Mr. PICKENS to reconsider the vote ordering the bill to its third reading being now in order.

Mr. ADAMS begged to know if it were not competent for him to urge the merits of his amendment as a reason for voting for the reconsideration?

The SPEAKER answering in the affirinative,

Mr. ADAMS proceeded. He would be very brief in the remarks he should address to the House. He said he had come to his seat at this special session of Congress, fully aware of the difficulties under which the Government was placed, and no less sensible of the embarrassinents which afflicted the people of the country. He had felt inclined to go for the measure now before the House, as a means of relieving the Administration from embarrassment, being willing to go for the relief of the Government, and thereby to relieve, indirectly, the people, whether the Government should propose any measure for the direct relief of the people or not. But when he had come to consider the bill, as it came from the Senate, he had been forced to the conviction that whatever relief it would afford the Government would be obtained at the expense of the people, it being, in substance, a bill to raise revenue. And what was the effect of the bill? A bill, bearing on its face one thing, and doing another! Purporting to postpone the operation of an act of Congress restoring to the people a portion of their own money, and, in reality, going to repeal that act! As the bill had passed the Senate, there was no further payment or deposite to be made of the proportion of the surplus revenue now due to the States without further legislation. It was, to all intents and purposes, a proposal to repeal the act of June, 1836. This was its great object. If its intention was not expressed, and apparent upon its face, the effe of it would be a decep. tion upon the people. His consu.sents (Mr. A. believed) might think the postponement of its operation reasonable, were the time to which it was postponed fixed and certain. there is now no such certainty upon the face of the bill; its operation is to be put off to a date as far distant as what the old Romans called the Calendus Gracas, or, as the French proverb terms it, "the week of the three Thursdays!" Now the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Pickens) proposes to postpone the operation of the act until the 1st of January, 1839, instead of until the further action of Congress. He, for one, was willing to take the bill with such an amendment; but there must be one other provision-an assurance that there shall be no more postponement, and that the sum thus appropriated shall be applied to that purpose, and to no other.

But

Mr. A. had called this a bill to raise revenue; and so it was. It would place in the hands of the Government nine or ten millions of dollars, to be appropriated to any other purpose. It would raise money from the people, for the payment of the public debts. And now where does this money bill come from? And, in asking this question, Mr. A. said he desired to ask that the bill should be viewed as a part of the whole system now projected for the raising of a revenue. The bill comes, first, from the Senate. And is that the branch of the National Legislature in which the Constitution requires that all such bills shall originate? Now all, not only this, but all the bills, which form a part of the system alluded to, have origmated in the other branch of Congress. Mr. A. would put these facts to the House, as a man specially entrusted with the guardianship of the public purse, and with the hope that such an appeal may produce its effect upon the action of the House on this bill, and in putting members more on their guard hereafter as to the source whence bills of this character emanate.

Mr. ADAMS said he had heard a good deal, at one time and enother, said about the great and growing extent of Executive patronage, and influence, and power. To most of such ru mors and expressions of opinions he had given but slight credence and as little of assent; but he could not avoid warning the House that, if the pockets of the people, their constituents, were to be ransacked for money, it behooved them to see that such measures originated with the representatives of the people. But, perhaps, suggested Mr. A. he had not been quite cor rect in saying that the bill in question had had its origin in the Senate. It would doubtless have been nearer the truth to have said that it, with its companions of the same general sys. tem, had originated at the Treasury. Every one of these bills had every mark and feature of such an origin; they were all, beyond question, drawn up and prepared at the Treasury Departinent! The chairman of the Committee of Ways and

this.

Mr. ADAMS said he was happy to receive this explanation from the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, and would be glad to hear further from him, why, atter the enor mous appropriations made last spring for this very object, it had become already necessary to appropriate for the service of this same year nearly two millions more. He expressed the hope that Mr. Pickens would accept his amendment as a inodification of his own.

Mr. PICKENS said he would willingly do so, but for the latter clause, pledging the faith of the United States that the Congress will provide for the payment of the money in January, 1839.

Mr. ADAMS observed that the proposition was divisible; and that if, after the House had made the appropriation, they think it best not to pledge the faith of the Government to carry it into effect, they could easily reject the latter part of the proposition. All he desired was to say to the people, "we have promised to pay over to you this sum: we cannot do it now for want of that sum to pay over: but we pledge you our faith that we will do so:" and certainly fifteen months will be found abundantly sufficient for the performance of such a pledge. Yet, if there was all this reluctance to the adoption of this part of the proposition, Mr. A. said he was willing to take the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina, modified by the adoption of his own, (Mr. Adams's) without the latter clause. All he professed to want was an assurance that the people shall not be paltered with any longer with delusive promises never to be performed.

The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Towns) had said (continued Mr. A.) that the people of that State, when contending for principles, cared nothing for dollars and cents. Well, (said Mr. A.) that was a good sign: he liked that: it was the sentiment of a high, lofty, and admirable spirit: but it so happened that, in the case under consideration, the dollars and cents were the very principle itself! And if the people of Georgia cared nothing for those articles, indeed, they would find many of their neighbors not one-half so disinterested, to whom they might easily make it over, and who would very cheerfully ac cept it at their hands. Or, the people of that high-spirited State might make it over, a munificent donation to the Treasury of the United States, and relieve themselves from all annoyance of "dollars and cents."

Mr. A. then argued briefly that, with the amendments proposed, this bill ceased to wear the aspect of a bill to raise re

venue.

Mr. A. alluded to the alleged differences of opinion existing in the House at the time of passing the act of 1936, as to the true nature of the measure, and whether it were a mere deposite bill, or a distribution bill. There certainly were, and now are, a great variety of arguments used on both sides of this question: but he had heard nobody on that floor arguing in favor of a recall, an actual recall, of the money already paid over to the States. No vote could be gotten in that body for a recall. That would be going back to the principles of the old Confederation. Under that system, the Congress of the United States had no power to raise money by their oten authority. To de fray the expenses of the Confederacy, whether of peace or war, Congress could only settle the proportions of the sum required for the public service, and issue to each State a requisition tor its own quota. This is precisely what would now be the form of recalling any portion of those inoneys once deposited in the Treasuries of the states; and if any gentleman wished to see the practical working of that system, let him go back to the records of the time, and see the answers that were made by the States to the requisitions of the old Congress. What were the answers?-not in a time of peace-and of plenty-and of prosperity-like that in which the nation has now been seized with this convulsion fit; but at a time when the very existence of the nation was at stake; in the midst of that glorious but soultrying war of independence, for the very support of which all the expenditures to be provided for were indispensable-what were the answers? Some never answered at all-some replied that it did not suit their convenience-some flatly refused-and others responded very like some of the deposite banks, which, being lately asked by the Secretary of the Treasury when they intended to resume specie payments, replied, "when the others do!" They were calling spirits from the vasty deep"-every body knowing, all the time, that the spirits would not come! [Continued laughter from all parts of the House.]

After alleging that one of the reasons adduced in oppositi-n to the distribution principle in certain quarters (nately, that it viewed the surplus funds as actually divided among the States,) was a strong argument in his mind, as a guardian of the people's interests in its favor, Mr. A. came to the consideration of yet another reason, which made him desire the pro. posed amendinent; and which indeed, rendered it impossible for him to go for the bill without it.

He said that a gentleman from Georgia. (Mr. Dawson,) in an exceedingly forcible speech, had pointed out the monstrous inequality with which this sum of $10,000,000, due to the States under the deposite act, had been deposited by the Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. A. said he could account only for this most extraordinary state of things by ascribing this inequality to the operation of the far-famed "Specie circular." In the Bank of Alabama, at Mobile, it appears by the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, that $1,000,000, and upwards, were left depo sited when the banks suspended specie payments. Two hun

H. of Reps.

dred thousand of this is put down under the title, "warrants heretofore drawn, but not yet paid, though payable." This was one of those favorite, but puzzling unintelligibilities which several gentlemen on this floor have complained of, in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury; and he (Mr. A.) had had been much perplexed to obtain a glimpse of as meaning. What, then, was the meaning of this circumlocution about "warrants, to the amount of two hundred thousand dollars, heretofore drawn, but not yet paid, though payable? Why, Mr. Speaker, all that simple means, that those warrants er drafts of the Secretary of the Treasury were protested! That's all! [Laugh.] The drafts were for specie "hard currency," "mint drops,"--and they were drawn on those hoards of specie accumulated by the "Specie circular." But the specie had .gone when the drafts arrived; and so the drafts were "not yet paid, though payable!" [Laugh.]

Sir, (said Mr A) give me leave to say a word or two on the alleged unintelligibility of the Secretary of the Treasury. 1 certainly cannot but feel a great degree of compassion 101 him, considering the necessity he was under of making a report to Congress, at any rate. There are a great many things which sound much better in circumlocution than when plainly expressed. The Secretary of the Treasury I know to be well versed in English composition; but there are subjects which the sublimest writers are obliged to cover with a veil, and I "guess," or I "reckon," that there were a good many of these troubling the brain of the Secretary at the time he drew up this much discussed report.

Mr. A. said he had attentively read the report, and must acknowledge that he had occasionally found in it a redundancy of words to disclose ideas, which might have been expressed with more precision. There were obscuries, like that of which be had given an example in the heading of the colunin of what he supposed to be protested drafts. But the general purport of the whole document was plain and clear enough-much more plain and clear indeed than it was pleasing to contemplate. He had listened a day or two before to some very ingenious remarke of the eloquent and able gentleman from Ohio, (Mr. Hamer) who, while discussing this subject, had instituted a dialogue between the General Government and the States; and he represented the General Government as saying, (in a very marked and emphatic manner) "Do YOU want this money? So do WE!" [A general laugh.] Sir, (said Mr. A.) the whole substance of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury may be summed up in those few words.

Mr. A. said he had another observation to make. A gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Thompson) had observed that it was a sort of uniform operation of this confederate Govern ment, that all the money of this nation "flowed to the North!" [Mr. Thompson here said, "I did say so." There is (said Mr. A.) an English poet, who has said,

"Ask where's the North!--at York, is on the Tweed." Now, sir, suppose yourself at Charleston, South Carolina, you ask, "Where's the North? With this maxim of the gentleman from South Carolina, and his system of geography, and the answer you would receive must be-at Charleston, South Carolina, the North.... is Mobile, Alabama; the North.... is Natchez, Mississippi; the North-is New Orleans, Louisiana. For these are "North" at Charleston,-if you assume that the money of the country is flowing to the North. 1 have named a single instauce-the Bank of Alabama, at Mobile-where there is a deposite of public money to the amount of more than a million of dollars. It flowed thither, I suppose, by the aid of "the far-tamed Specie circular," in "mint drops" and "hard currency." Now, what is that million worth? The amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina, and my own added to it, will secure to that bank the use of that money for fifteen months,-that is, until January, 1839; and what would it be worth to that institution, and to the interests affected by the well-being of that institution? Ia ordinary banking, six per centum. But when it is in the bank, while issuing notes without paying specie when called for, it is worth twenty per centurn, at least. That million of dollars is equivalent to a gratuiteus donation to the Bank of Mobile, and thereby to the State of Alabama, of two hundred thousand dollars a year.

Pursuing the idea suggested by Mr. DAWSON, of Georgia, in regard to the palpable and monstrous inequality with which the money, appropriated to the liquidation of the instalment yet due, had been deposited among the States, Mr. ADAMS de manded what proportion was en deposite with Massachusetts? Unless he was mistaken greatly, the whole sum in all the banks employed as the depositories of the public money in that State was $81,278 40, or about two-fifths the sum which falls to the Bank of Alabama alone, as the value of the use of the fund on deposite there. What is the benefit to Massachusetts, he would ask, of that deposite, as it now stande? At six per cent. it is worth about $4,000, and that is the deposite of public moneys which Massachusetts offsets against the $1,000,000 in Alabania. Mr. ADAMS said he had an inquiry to make of the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, (Mr. Cambreleng,) with regard to one of the unintelligibilities of the Treasury report, which he was desirous of having explained. Until this was Cone, he could not gather from that document whether or not the $81,278 40, put down as deposited with Massachusetts, was all the public nioney for which that State was responsible to the Government. In reading over the report, he found a list of banks, beginning with the State of Maine, and proceeding southward, and the sums of public money on d posite in each. Under date of August 28, 1837, between the banks of Maine and those of Connecticut, he observed a sum total against the sim. ple words, "Metropolis specia!." Now, as the State of Marsa chusetts lies between Maine and Connecticut, Mr. A. would fain know if the word "metropolis" there may not mean Boston?

Mr. CAMBRELENG. The Bank of the Metropolis in this city (Washington) is probably referred to.

Mr. ADAMS. What is the nature of that deposite?

Mr. CAMBRELENG explained that that special deposite in the Bank of the Metropolis was to meet some of the cu rent expenses of the Government, incurred in that part of the country.

Mr. ADAMS. Oh! a "special" deposite for the use of some of the pets, some of the favorites, the preferred public cirditers, (of which class I supposed I must consider myrell a member, since the Secretary's offer to pay us our per diem in specie.)

Mr. CAMBRELENG would remind the gentlem an that theres were other pets, and other favorites, besides those around us. There was the navy yard on the Potomac, and —

Mr. ADAMS. But that navy yard is not "between Maine

25th CONG....1st SESS.

and Connecticut," Mr. Speaker. (Laugh. And I am still in the dark as to the meaning of that line in the report of the Seretary, which seems to make Massachsetts responsible for a yet larger share of the public treasure than, in her own proper place in the report, she is set down as holding in deposite. And this is the more remarkable, because in this same statement appende 1 to the Secretary's report, the Bank of the Metropolis in this city has its proper place afterwards between the banks of the State of Maryland and those of the State of Virginia, and therefore cannot naturally be supposed to be the same "Metropolis special" thus thrust up in a corner between the States of Maine and of Connecticut. It all goes to corroborate the idea that this same report of the Secretary of the Treasury is far from being so explicit and intelligible to all, as it is to those gentlemen whose sagacity finds it so easy to be understood.

Besides, sir, I find in this Treasurer's weekly statement of the amount to his credit, in the various banks of public deposite, the Bank of the Metropolis, District of Columbia, in its proper place, located between Maryland and Virginia, with a small balance of $2,162 83 conts due to the Treasurer, and that whole sum, except $9 and 4 cents in the column of warrants heretofore drawn, but not yet paid, though payable. And in the statement marked K, this same Bank of the Metropolis is included in a list of deposite banks discontinued under the deposite act of June, 1836. And it is not included in the list of present deposite banks under the same act, marked L. In the circularletter of the Secretary to the delinquent banks, I find it written: "The imperative provisions of the act of June, 1835, make it the duty of this Department to discontinue ordering any further sums of public money to be placed with the depo site banks after suspending specie payments, and hence you are notified that no more can be thus deposited in your institution, provided such a failure to redeem your notes has actually oc

curred."

Is it a

"No more can be thus deposited in your institution." The Rank of the Metropolis, in the District of Columbia, is one of the deposite banks discontinued by the positive command of the law; but "Metropolis special," between Maine and Connectient, has a deposite dated the 28th of August, of $140,541 62 cts. By what authority was that deposite made? This is to me one of these unintelligible things in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, which I should be glad to see explained. practical illustration of the divorce between bank and State? or of the locomotive power of the Secretary to transport the Metropolis from the District of Columbia to Massachusetts, to New Hampshire, to Rhode Island, to some undefined region botween Maine and Connecticut, where he could make a special deposite of gold without infringing upon "the imperative provisions of the act of June, 18367"

I should like to know why this item is thus thrust between Maine and Connecticut, as if it were intended to give Massachusets the reputation of having $140,000 of the money which is used to pay members of Congress and the navy yard expenses at New York?

But I was observing upon the profound philosophical and reographical statement submitted to the House by the gentleman rom South Carolina, (Mr. Thompson,) in which it was asserted that the money of the United States "always flows to the North." Now I have given the House one example, in the case of Alabama. Let us look a little farther: here I find the Union Bank of Louisiana and the Bank of New Orleans have, together, an amount nearly equal to $1,500,000. Here is a million and a half flowing to that extremity of the North, New Orleans, and ⚫here is upwards of one million seven hundred thousand dollars flowing into the deposite banks of the State of Mississippi at Natchez. Now, with the utmost respect for the States of Louisi ana and Mississippi, they are not so near to the north pole, that they should have between them more than three millions of United States money, which the gentleman from South Carolina insists is always flo sing to the North-money which is, in fact,

a gift bestowed upon them without law, at least not by law, but by the operation of a specie circular, which required all payments to them to be made in gold and silver, and yet they have not a dollar forthcoming. I will put the interest on this specie at ten per cent.; six per cent. is certainly too little. The use of these deposites would be worth six per cent. even if they might be called away at any moment. I will put the interest at ten por cent. Here, then, we have placed at the disposal of the banks of Louisiana $1,500,000, which I say is equivalent to a pure donation to that State of $150,000 a year, so long as the deposite shall continue. And how goes it with the State of Missis. sippi? I find here that the Planters' Bank and branches, Natchez, have $895.000, and the Agricultural Bank and branches, Natchez, $819,000, making $1,741 009. Here is an actual bon to that State of 174,000. They have had this since July already, and they will continue to have it until it suite their convenience to pay it over, which I hope they will do before the 1st of January, 1839.

Well, I am, notwithstanding, willing to vote for this bill, leaving this matter as it is, provided the banks of Alabama and Louisiana and Mississippi will pay back this money on or be fore the 1st of January, 1239.

We come next to the State of Tennessee Her share is but small, amounting to not over $500,000. If she was entitled to receive her share of the deposites on the 1st of October, she might set off that amount, and suffer no injury. She would then have the use of this money, and would sill get her por tion of the deposites like the other States. Then we come to Ohio; and, in respect to her, it seems to be admitted as a settled affair, that all her banks are good and sound, only their notes will not command the specie without a little premium of ten per cent. Ohio has got $900,000. She is a large State, and, in the critical condition of her politics, may have been thought a cheap purchase at this amount. It is not, at any rate, a very extravagant sum. Indiana has a large portion. But here there is another "Northward flowing" of a different kind. Here we come to a State hardly a year old. It is hardly a year since we were discussing her admission into the Union; and if she was not satisfied with the conduct of the Government then, I think at least she must be now. Here is Michigan, with more than one million of dollars, which is equal to a clear donation of $100 000. Does the geography of the gentleman from South Carolina consider Michigan as a place to which the money of the United States flows Northward? All this vast tide of specie, according to my geography, has flowed Southward and Westward. As to the North, the flowing in that direction has been in a precious small rill.

What is the conclusion from these facts? The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Dawson) complained that Georgia had not had her portion, and he did but justice to his own State, if we consider what has been given to Alabama and Mississippi, Louisiana and Michigan. But what is it if put in comparison with Massachusetts? What has she got in this distribution? The special Metropolitan deposite not being a part of it, as from this table one would suppose? Why, sir, she has got $81.271 84 cents--a sum which any one of her banks will pay in five minutes, if you will take off the interdict. Is there justice in this? Gentlemen complain of the mode aud manner in which the deposite law operates, and about the standard of distribution on which it proceeds, as being unjust and unequal; but, sir, what is that inequality, in comparison to this deposite made without law, to a rate of deposite which gives a million and a half to one State, a million seven hundred thousand to another, a million four hundred thousand to another, and to Massachusetts $81,271 81 cents, supposing its banks not to pay the $50,000, which is all they owe? I will not ask how many good friends of the Administration have been made, or how many precious votes in this House secured, by this system of operations. When we came to make this deposite, I mean the deposite by law, I remember well the arguments of gentlemen who wanted a dif

H. of Reps.

ferent standard of distribution adopted. They complained of a distribution according to the ratio of representation in both Houses of Congress, because it gave too much to Delaware, to Rhode Island, and other small States. Now, sir, it was not the Northern States, but the small, and the Western States chiefly, which got this extra proportion. I was willing they should have it, because, since the last census was taken, their population had increased much more than that of Massachusetts. I assented to this ratio because the new States, who were most in want of money, would be most benefited by it, and I voted for the bill. But the very interest which the members took on that occasion in this question, and the earnestness with which they argued the necessity of an equal principle, proved the earnest ness with which every member of the House adhered to the proportional right of his own State.

But what was that ratio of distribution in comparison to this? When $1,500,000 is given to one State? Alabama had five members in the House and two in the Senate; Massachusetts had twelve in the House and two in the Senate. Their propor tions were, therefore, as 7 to 14. To this I assented. But what is the proportion here? Alabama gets $1,500,000, and Massachusetts $80,000. I say nothing about Pennsylvania. She is one of the largest States in the Union, and she has $249,000 in the Girard Bank, $5,500 in the Moyamensing Bank; but of this sum there has already been drawn, upon the Girard Bank, in warrants not yet paid, though payable, $160,000, leaving only about $95,000 as the share of actual deposite held by Pennsyl vania. But, when we consider the population of Pennsylvania, what is the proportion of $250,000 given to Pennsylvania, and $1,700,000 to Missicsippi

I have intruded upon the patience of the House to a greater extent than I intended. Its patience has been my encouragement. If this bill passes, I wish it to pass with the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina; but I consider the whole measure as a violation of the public faith, for which the last Administration is responsible to this nation, to the creditors of this country abroad, and to posterity-especially responsible to the people of those States s grossly injured by the withholding from them of the fourth instalment of the sum promised them by the act of June, 1836, by the lavish donation of their money to the people of other States, which they now refuse to refund. That this crying injustice may not be repeated by a further postponement or repeal of the deposite act, I demand, with the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina, fixing the term of payment to the 1st of January, 189, a pledge that the money shall then be faithfully paid; and for this purpose that the balances actually due from the late deposite banks shall be appropriated to that payment. They are the identical moneys announced, on the 3d of January last, as being then in the Treasury, to be divided among the States under the act of June, 1830. They are more than suficient to pay the whole of the fourth instalment. But if the whole sum cannot be recovered from the banks, where it has been deposited, before the 1st of January, 1839, I ask a further contingent appropriation of the money to be paid by the late Bank of the United States in October, 1838, to the same object. If a further indulgence of time beyond the 1st of January, 1839, should become necessary to complete the recovery of the balances due by the deposite banks, that indulgence should be granted by the whole nation, and not at the expense of the States entitled to the fourth instalment. In the amendment which I proposed in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, I added further, that if the recovered balances, and the instalment of October, 1838, from the late Bank of the United States, should still prove insufficient for the payment of the fourth instalment to the States, the faith of the United States should be pledged that further and effective provision should be made by Congress therefor. Finding some of my friends here willing to vote for the rest of my amendment, but objecting to that, I shall withdraw that clause, with the hope that no further pledge of faith will be necessary for the fulfilment of that which has been given.

THE END.