33D CONG....2D SESS.

The other danger is this: If you continue this appropriation to E. K. Collins & Co. it will not stop with that company. You will find it but the entering wedge to the building up of a large commercial steam navy. You will find Congress continually besieged with solicitations to establish other lines, with the war clause included, and the result will be, that Government will find itself in alliance with commercial companies, under the delusion of the war clause, and these companies will monopolize a large part of the ocean trade under the protection of Federal subsidies. In the mean time your naval expenditures will not diminish one dollar.

What ought we to do? I answer, comply rigidly and in good faith with existing obligations, but refuse to extend the system. We ought not to make any more contracts. We ought to avail ourselves of the right we have, under existing stipulations, to withdraw any bounties which have been conferred under this system. When these contracts expire, we ought to leave commerce free and unfettered. We ought to take these monopolies off the ocean, and disconnect the Government entirely from them.

Now, a word upon another point. Gentlemen have proclaimed here, with great emphasis, that this has been a losing operation to this company; that they embarked in it as a sort of test of maritime skill and superiority; and they have been successful. It is said that the cost of running these vessels is enormous, and that the income from passengers, freights, and mails does not sustain them. It is said their bonds are at a discount in the market, and that no dividends have been declared. But I call the attention of the committee, and of the country, to this fact: that neither in the year 1852, when the struggle took place upon the question of giving the line this extra pay, nor since that period, up to the present day, have we ever had an authentic and official sworn exhibit of the receipts and expenditures of this company. We have never had an official, authentic, and sworn exhibit, so far as I know, of what it costs them to run these vessels-of the items of expenses and of income. And will Congress expend hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, and upon the opinions expressed by gentlemen upon this floor, that the cost has been large, and that a loss has been incurred? Will you suffer the interior mail service of the United States to be wronged? Will you refuse to graut mail facilities to the west, the southwest, and the northwest, which the wants of the country require, while, at the same time, you are lavishing enormous sums upon an ocean monopoly, upon mere general ex parte and unsworn statements?

Mr. OLDS. I should like to ask the gentleman a single question. Does he suppose that by the striking down of the Collins line we shall get any additional mail service in the interior? The appropriations for this Collins mail steamship service are from the general revenue of the country and not from the revenue of the Post Office Department.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. I do not want to make an argumentum ad hominem, but that is what you said last year. [Laughter.]

Mr. OLDS. Some of our foreign mail steamers are paid out of the revenues of the Post Office Department; therefore they have no connection with that subject. The Collins line steamers are not of them.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. Whether we would get additional mail facilities or not—although I really think that if we took away a part of the extravagant sums of money which we pay for the foreign mail service we might apply some of it to the internal mail service-still it is unjust to lavish these sums upon the ocean mails when we are neglecting those in the interior of the country.

But to pass from that. Now, sir, I want the committee when they vote upon this proposition to vote with some sort of evidence, and I will try to give them official egidence of the affairs of that company as far as we can get it. I recollect the argument in 1852 was, "Give the steamers the increased pay, and they will more than return it to the Government in a year or two by the postage.' Like a great many predictions made at the same time it did not turn out to be true.

The gentleman from Ohio spoke yesterday of

Ocean Mail Service-Mr. Breckinridge.

the increase derived from postages. I could not hear distinctly, and his speech has just been laid upon our tables, so that I have had no time to look at it. But I will give an official statement of the amount of postages received from this line from the beginning of its service: Statement showing the total amount of postages received on mails conveyed by the Collins line of steamers from 27th April, 1850, to June 30, 1854; also the same less the British portion; also the total ocean postage. By the Collins line for year ending 30th June1850. On letters in open mail..... 1851. On letters in

open mail..... 1851. On papers in open mail.. 1851. On closed mails 1852. On letters in open mail.... 1852. On letters in

closed mail..... 1852. On newspapers in open mail 1852. On letters in open mail...... 1853. On letters in

Total Ocean. 6,927 61 137,227 81

3,934 20 4,485 56 152.578 41 11,931 18 5,619 48 155,515 40 30,679 58

Total post- Total less ages. British. 10,391 41 205,841 71

9,092 48 180,111 49

30,679 59 6,118 90 6,118 90 265,407 75 170,936 50 33,599 80 33,599 80 33,599 80 8,909 58 8,909 58 8,909 59 $1,049,059 85° $931,087 14 $734,466 01

4,485 56 200,259 15 11,931 18 5,619 48 204,113 96 30,679 58 6,118 90 232,231 78

Total ocean postage for the year ending

June 30, 1850...

closed mail..... 1833. On newspapers in open mail 1854. On letters in open mail.. 1854. On letters in

closed mail... 1854. On newspapers in open mail

June 30, 1851. June 30, 1852. June 30, 1853 June 30, 1854..

6,927 61 145,647 57 170,129 07

192,313 88 219.447 88 $734,466 01

That looks like the receipts from the postages upon letters carried by these steamships equaling the expenditures!

Mr. OLDS. I hope the gentleman from Kentucky will allow me to explain that matter. The gentleman speaks by the courtesy of the House, and I trust that I may be allowed.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. Certainly.

Mr. OLDS. Under our postal treaty with Great Britain, we pay that Government twenty per cent. of the mailable matter carried by the Collins line, and she pays us twenty per cent. on the mailable matter carried by the Cunard line. Then, in making out our estimates, if we deduct from the mailable matter carried by the Collins line the twenty per cent. which we pay the British Government, that line should have the credit of the twenty per cent. which the Cunard line pays us on the mailable matter which it carries. Here I have the statement of the Auditor of the Post Office Department, and it gives precisely the figures which I gave on yesterday. Deducting the twenty per cent. which we pay the British Government, and adding the twenty per cent. which we receive on the mailable matter carried by the Cunard line, and we have the figures which I gave the committee yesterday.

[Cries of What are they?"]

Mr. OLDS. For the year ending 30th of June, 1850, the postage amounted to $135,662 68; for 1851, $300,205 75; for 1852, $335,637 51; for 1853, $361,336 04; for 1854, $397,481 96.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. In order to give these steamers their proper credit-to wit, the ocean postage-the Postmaster General makes the receipts for 1851, $145,647; for 1852, $170,139; for 1853, $192,313; for 1854, $219,400.

Mr. OLDS. I will explain that matter. The Postmaster General deducts the compensation paid to postmasters on this mailable matter, and also deducts the twenty per cent. which we pay to the British Government for the mailable matter carried by the Collins line, and then refused to add the twenty per cent. which we paid to the Cunard line.

HO. OF REPS.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. The proper view is to credit the line with the sums we receive from the mailable matter carried by it, and this has been done. The gentleman's statement is ingenious, but delusive. He speaks of our paying the British Government twenty per cent. on the mail matter carried by the Collins line. True, but this is for the inland British postage, and the Collins ships do not carry the mails in the interior of England-hence they should not be credited by them. So with the twenty per cent. Britain pays us on the matter carried by the Cunard line, which is the American inland postage. Each is wholly distinct from the ocean postage, with which alone the Collins line is, and ought to be credited. The point I make, then, is this: that the postages which we have received bear no sort of proportion to the enormous expenditures which we have incurred. Therefore, gentlemen were false prophets when they predicted that, in the arrangement which they' urged, the mails would pay the expenses.

Mr. BARRY. This $728,000 is deducted in consideration of the expenses of inland transportation on the same material. Therefore it is right to deduct it. The steamers carry the mails to the shore, and this $728,000 is deducted as so much given for the carriage of the mail from the steamer to the place where it is to be delivered. It is for inland transportation, and ought not to go to the credit of the line.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. I will now submit to the committee some official estimates in regard to the receipts and expenses of this line. We can get no statement from the company itself, and as we cannot get anything but loose and general declarations upon this floor, it is important to avail ourselves of the best attainable sources of information. I therefore send up to the Clerk's table an estimate from the Post Office Department, of their receipts and expenses, that it may be read to the committee, and I ask their especial attention to it. The Clerk read the estimate, as follows: ESTIMATED RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES OF EACH ROUND TRIP PERFORMED BY THE COLLINS STEAMERS. Estimated Receipts.

Say the average number of first-class passengers each way is 80, at an average fare of $140 each.... $22,400 The freight the year round will average 500 tons measurement each way, or 1,000 tons the round trip, at an average charge of $22 per ton....... 22,000 Total receipts exclusive of mail pay and secondclass passengers.....

Estimated Expenditures.
The coal used per round trip will average 1,800
tons, at $7.50 per ton.....
.$13,500
Board of 80 first-class passengers, at $3
per day each, allowing 12 days each way, 5,760
Board of 10 officers at the same rate.....
360
Board of crew at 80 cents each per day,
and allowing 30 days to the month...... 2,616
Insurance, about 5 per cent. a year on
$600,000, and allowing 12 round trips a
year......
2,500

Pilot fees, port charges, wharfage, lighter-
age, and light dues per each round trip.. - 700
Allowance for board, &c., of second class
passengers .......

2,064 $27,500

Add salaries of officers, engineers, crew, &c., for one month, allowing that period for the performance of a round trip.... 4,363

Net profits of each round trip.....

$44,400

31,863

$12,537 Net profits of 26 round trips performed in a year, $325,962 Add amount received froin the Government each year for transportation of the mails.......

Shows a total profit per year year of.........................

858,000 $1,183,962

The information upon which the foregoing statement is based, is believed to be perfectly reliable and correct, and has been obtained from a source entitled to the fullest confidence.

It is proper to state, however, that the estimate of receipts is very considerably less than the actual amount realized on passengers and freight, while the expenditures are stated at their full amount, and, it is believed, even beyond what is actually incurred. The statement has been thus prepared with the view of presenting the result in as unfavorable a light, with respect to the profits of the proprietors, as pos sible; and the profit of $12,537 per round trip (exclusive of the amount of $33,000 received each trip for transporting the mails) which it exhibits, is certainly within the true

33D CONG....2D SESS.

average price is calculated at $22 per ton, which is a low average, as the prices charged vary from $18 to $30 a ton. The average fare of second-class passengers is $67 each, but as they are ordinarily few in number, the proprietors have not been charged with any receipts from that source, although it will be observed that they are credited with an expenditure of $2,064 for the board of that class of passengers.

The number of officers and crew employed on board of each of the Collins steamers, with their salaries, are as follows:

Captain, $1,000 per trip and expenses; first mate, $75 per month, and board in port; second mate, $50, do.; third, $45, do.; boatswain, $35, do.; 4 quartermasters, $30 each per month; 18 sailors, $20 do.; chief engineer, $150 per month and board in port; 2 first assistants, $100 each do.; 2 second assistants, $75 do.: 2 third assistants $62 do.; 3 oilers, $45 do.; 24 firemen, $30 do; 18 coal heavers, $20 do.; 3 storekeepers and mess boys, $15 do.; purser, $75 do.; steward, $75 do.; second steward, $40 do.; head cook, $60 do., 2 pantrymen, $25 each do.; first stewardess, $20 do.; second stewardess, $15 do.; 1 waiter to every six passengers at $15 each per month; 1 butcher, I baker, and 1 pantryman, $30 do; about a dozen scullions, lob-lolly boys, &c., &c., at $12 each per month.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. That estimate was made some time since, and is slightly inaccurate in some respects, but chiefly against the Government. I hold in my hands another, by Captain Charles T. Bell, of the United States Navy, and Superintendent and Inspector of the United States Mail Steamers, made February 9, 1855, which contains the best information I have been able to get, since Mr. Collins will furnish nothing. I will read it:

NEW YORK, February 9, 1855. SIR: In compliance with the instructions received from you at your office in Washington, I beg leave to make the following report:

As soon after my arrival in New York as possible, I called upon Mr. Redfield, the collector, who readily promised to give me the information I wanted, if it could be obtained at the custom house.

Inclosed is a list of the number of passengers which have arrived in the Collins line of steamers for the year 1854. This list was copied from the books of the customhouse. It will be seen that for the three ships, the aggregale amount is two thousand six hundred and ninety-eight -nearly an equal number is taken out, making about five thousand two hundred; an average of seventeen hundred and thirty-three passengers carried by each ship during the year 1854.

There was no means of ascertaining at the custom-house the quantity of freight carried (in tons) by these ships, as all articles are invoiced in packages.

From particular inquiries which I have made, I have learned that each of these steamers have room for nine hundred tons of goods, with a full passenger list-more can be carried if the passenger berths are used for freight; which I am told is the case when the number is not filled up. Full freights are carried for eight months in the year. There is some falling off during the other four months. This was the case when there was competition with the Cunard line, but as that competition has now in a measure ceased, it is presumed that full freights will be carried all the year round.

It is exceedingly difficult to obtain any certain information in regard to the cost of a trip of one of these ships out and home, or "round trip." The expenses of the Bremen line, per round trip, are about thirty-two thousand dollars, The Humboldt, of the Havre line, was about thirty-six thousand dollars per trip. This covers all expenses, including subsistence for passengers, and ordinary repairs of engine and hull. I think, therefore, that forty thousand dollars per round trip, might be considered a full average for each of the ships of the Collins line.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, CHARLES H. BELL, Captain United States Navy, and Superintendent and Inspector of United States Mail Steamships, New York. Hon. JAMES CAMPBELL, Postmaster General, Washington.

Ocean Mail Service-Mr. Breckinridge.

able information that could be obtained, and by an officer of the Government charged specially with the superintendence of these ships.

I will now read a letter from the Postmaster General to the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which, with the communication of Captain Bell, modifies somewhat the first estimate presented:

POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, February 13, 1855. SIR: I have the honor to inclose herewith a copy of a communication received from Captain Charles H. Bell, superintendent and inspector of United States mail steamships at New York, containing further information relative to the receipts and expenditures of the Collins steamers, a statement of which I transmitted to you on the 2d instant. It appears that the number of passengers which arrived at New York by said steamers during the past year, as taken from the books in the custom-house, was as follows: Baltic-Total by seven arrivals.....

66

......932 ....813

Average number by each arrival.......... Atlantic-Total by six arrivals...

66 Average number by each arrival.. Pacific-Total by seven arrivals..

66

.....

133 1351 .......953 136 Average number by each arrival.......... Making an average of about 135 passengers carried on each voyage from Liverpool during the year 1854. Supposing that an equal number were carried on the outward voyages from New York, which, it is fair to presume, was the fact, the receipts from passengers each round trip would be $37,800, instead of $22,400, as estimated in the statements furnished on the 2d instant.

It further appears that these steamers are capable of taking nine hundred tons of goods, each way, with a full passenger list, and that full freights were carried during eight months of the year, at a time when the competition was much greater than at present, as the Cunard steamers were making their regular weekly trips. The amount of freight may, therefore, be safely calculated at 700 tons each way, instead of 500 tons, as estimated in former statements, and yielding an income, per round trip, of $30,800 instead of $22,000.

Making these corrections, the total receipts, each round trip, from passengers and freight, would be.. $68,600 The expenditures per round trip were estimated in the statement already furnished at $31,863; but taking the estimate of $40,000, which Mr. Bell considers a full average of all the expenditures per round trip for each of the ships on the Collins line, including the ordinary repairs of engines and hull

40,000

Mr. CUTTING. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. I will.

Mr. CUTTING. I perceive that in the Postmaster General's estimate no allowance whatever is made for repairs either of sails, spars, yards, boilers, or engines. I desire to ask the gentleman from Kentucky whether, in the other statement which he has read, there is any such allowance made?

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. In the statement of Captain Bell?

Mr. CUTTING. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. I do not think there is. But there are some omissions in this statement to which I will call the attention of the committee. Some things might have been charged against the line which have not been charged. Captain Bell

Ho. OF REPS.

as to that point. As I understand it, the Postmaster General makes no discrimination between the freight brought from Liverpool to this country, and the freight that they take in at New York for Liverpool. He makes no discriminations in regard to the rates of compensation for those two different shipments, in either of the statements from which the gentleman has read.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. I am not aware that he does.

Mr. CUTTING. He does not.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. Well, what is the freight worth per ton?

Mr. CUTTING. I cannot speak with accuracy upon that point; and, therefore, I would not like the committee to rely on any statement of mine. But this I will state as a general fact, that the passages of packet ships, going to the eastward, average twenty-one days, while the passages to the westward average from thirty-five to forty days. The consequence is, that in the competition for freight from this country to Europe, they stand very nearly upon an equality with the steamers; and the steamers take freight at about the rates at which packet ships take it, or a little above. But in coming from Europe to this country, the amount of charge by the steamers is very much greater than that by sailing packets, in consequence of the difficulty of coming westward. Hence it is, that if the freight is all put together, it does not aid us in reference to this matter.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. It certainly aids us some. The remarks of the gentleman from New York are like all the other remarks of the friends of this measure-general in their character. You cannot get from any of them any specific information. The Government of the United States have obtained information through the estimates of sworn officers of this Government, and if the Collins line will not furnish us with a sworn statement, we must get the information in the best way

we can.

Mr. OLDS. Has the Government ever called upon Mr. Collins for any such statement?

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. The Collins line were called upon here, by myself and a number of others, in 1852, when they were pressing for increased compensation on the ground of losses, to furnish a statement to Congress. What a question is that! I ask the gentleman from Ohio, as a legislator, whether he does not think that a private company coming here to ask for pay over and above their contract, on the ground that they have incurred losses, ought to found that application on a detailed and sworn statement? Why, then, does he talk about the Government calling for a statement, under circumstances like these?

Mr. OLDS. When the gentleman asserts that they refuse to make a statement, he ought to have evidence that the Department has called on them for one. It has never been done regularly. Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. When these gentlethe grounds upon which they make the applicamen come here to ask a favor they ought to give tion, and they have been repeatedly called upon on the floor of Congress for a full and detailed statement.

Mr. OLDS. Never officially.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. Do I understand the gentleman to say that they never have been called upon for a statement?

Mr. OLDS. Yes, sir; never by any Department of the Government, although they may have been called upon by gentlemen in speeches upon

this floor.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. I take the ground that, when a private company come and ask Congress to do what it is not required to do by the contract-to give them increased compensation for their service and found that application upon the ground of losses incurred by them in the performance of that service, they ought to lay before us a full and detailed statement of their affairs, showing their expenditures and losses. Now, let me go on.

Mr. CHANDLER. Will the gentleman allow me a moment?

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. Not at this point. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman declines to yield the floor.

Mr. OLDS. Why, he is only occupying it by the courtesy of the committee.

33D CONG....2D SESS.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. True; I will yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania for a moment. Mr. CHANDLER. I do not rise to disturb the current of the gentleman's remarks, nor now to argue in favor of the project that is before the committee.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. My time is rapidly passing away. Please come to the point at once.

Mr. CHANDLER. What I wish to say is this: that, while the gentleman is presenting certain statements and calculations as evidence of what can be done, or what would be done, I am instructed to bring before the House, by a friend, what has been done. Whether I have left the statement at the Department, with some other papers which I left there, I do not know. But I had a statement, furnished me by a gentleman who is a member of the company, and not a resident of New York, compiled from the balance-sheet, which showed the dead loss to the company, up to the present time, to be $334,500.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. When my friend brings in that statement we will look at it.

Mr. CHANDLER. Well, allow my statement

at least to offset those which have been prepared by persons who are not concerned at all, and which are mere estimates.*

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. Now, I will go on, if my friend will allow me. Captain Bell says further:

"The average price is calculated at twenty two dollars per ton, which is a low average, as the prices charged vary from eighteen to thirty dollars a ton. The average fare of second-class passengers is eighty-seven dollars each, but as they are ordinarily few in number, the proprietors have not been charged with any receipts from that source, although it will be observed that they are credited with an expenditure of $2,064 for the board of that class of passengers."

Well, sir, allowing a large margin for everything which has been claimed for the company by gentlemen here, I ask you whether this statement, as it foots up, will not be startling to the country? I ask you how gentlemen, in view of the fact that, according to the best estimates we can get, after the closest investigation, the annual net profits of this line, including the mail pay, amounts to the enormous sum of $1,601,000, can refuse to relieve the Government from the bounty, when it has reserved the power to do so? Why not do it? Will the country be satisfied? Will gentlemen in their own cooler moments be satisfied, notwithstanding all this thunder-gust of patriotism and

all this Buncombe talk about "Cunard steamers," and "British competition?" How can you justify yourselves before an intelligent public sentiment in giving extraordinary advantages and large gratuities to a private company over the other commerce of this Union, especially when that company does not choose to make a statement of its affairs to the House to show that they have suffered loss as they allege?

Now, sir, here is a letter which was put into my hands by some member of the House this morning, written by Mr. Vanderbilt, of New York, a name coeval with the rise and progress of ocean steam navigation. I ask that it be read. But in presenting it, I do not mean to say that I will vote to give a contract to Mr. Vanderbilt, for I will not do it. I will not vote a contract to anybody. I would pass a general law.

Mr. ORR, (interrupting.) The letter which the gentleman proposes to have read has been addressed to the Postmaster General. It is a copy from the Post Office Department.

Mr. PECKHAM. Irise to a question of order.

Acquisition of Cuba-Mr. Chastain.

WASHINGTON, February 15, 1855.

SIR: The Cunard line between New York and Liverpool having been withdrawn, and a frequent and rapid communication with Europe being so essential to the interest of our commerce, I submit the following proposition to the Postmaster General:

I will run a semi-monthly line, which, by alternating with the Collins line, would form a weekly communication. And I will perform this proposed mail service for the sumof $15,000, the voyage out and home-the contract to exist for five years-providing, that in the event of a war with any European Power, the Government shall take the steamers at a fair valuation-and may at any time in their discretion take them at such valuation. And further, whenever our Government shall abandon the policy of extending protection from the Treasury to ocean steamers, I will agree that my proposed compensation shall be withdrawn. Good and sufficient steamers shall be put on the line within thirty days after the contract is signed.

With great respect, sir, your obedient servant,

C. VANDERBILT.

To the Hon. JAMES CAMPBELL, Postmaster General.

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. Mr. Chairman, on that letter I want now to make this statement to the committee: You made a contract with Mr. Collins and his associates at the rate of $19,250 the round trip. Afterwards you gave them $33,000 per trip, reserving the right to terminate that arrangement on giving six months' notice. The proposition now is to terminate the arrangement for the additional allowance, and this being agreed to, it would still leave them their $19,250 per trip. Can you refuse to direct such notice to be given in the face of the fact that there is a proposition made to perform the same mail service for $15,000 per trip?

Mr. OLDS. Will the gentleman from Kentucky allow me to say a word?

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. No; not just now. I ask this committee, how are you to refuse giving this notice? I speak in no harshness towards the gentlemen connected with this line, for, I repeat, if Congress goes into such business as this, these gentlemen are right to get all they can. If we are to They are perfectly right to do it. set ourselves up to make contracts, and to give bounties, they may as well take them as anybody else. But how can we do it? How can we justify ourselves to the country if we do it? can we do it, I ask, in the face of the additional fact that, by the best estimates which we have been able to procure, this line has been profitable, and that, therefore, there can be no appeal to the bounty of Congress on the score of losses? No,

How

sir; we cannot do it. Look at this subject calmly. There is no breach of faith; nothing involving our honor. The original price of $19,250 a trip, which we would still give them, is more than other citizens of the country are willing to do the service for. And, according to the best light that Congress can get, this company has made profits, large profits, under the old arrangement. Shall we continue the bounty under the pretext that these vessels will answer for war steamers, or under the

delusive cry of Cunard competition? Why should we ingraft a false system on the country? Shall we retrace the steps which we have recently taken to abandon the ill-advised policy of 1847 in regard to the getting up of war steamers for commercial purposes?

Sir, the facts, the arguments, the political philosophy, are all on one side of the question, and if you refuse to terminate the bounty, public retribation will follow this day's business.

ACQUISITION OF CUBA.

OF GEORGÍA,

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,"

February 17, 1855.

The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union

Mr. CHASTAIN said:

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Were I to consult my own feelings, I would allow the remainder of the ses sion to pass without taking any further part in its proceedings than answering to my name, and recording my vote on such questions as may come before the House, convinced, as I have long been, that the greatest obstacle to legislative action, and, consequently, the most common subject of wellfounded complaint, on the part of our respective

Ho. OF REPS.

constituencies, is our inveterate proneness to oratorical display.

It has ever been my habit to act promptly; nay, boldly, when my judgment has been formed, and my course decided; to halt at no stopping places; to lose no time in useless parade, nor delay my purpose by ostentatious harangues, either in laudation of my wisdom or explanation of my course. Action, sir, is my principle, and I have ever been willing to permit that action to speak for itself. Justice, however, to myself, to my constituents, to the South, and to the country, demand that I should trespass, for a few moments, on the patience of the House, whilst I protest, in the most emphatic manner, against the propositions submitted to this House, a few days since, by the honorable member from South Carolina, [Mr. BoYCE,] in reference to our present and prospective relations with Spain and the Island of Cuba. No gentleman in this House, or out of it, is more willing than I am to acknowledge the abilities, and the patriotism, of the honorable member from South Carolina; that he should labor under what I conceive to be so extraordinary a hallucination-extraordinary, because the gentleman represents, in part, a gallant State, that has ever been foremost in defense of southern interests-is to my mind a political paradox of ominous import. It can only be accounted for by analyzing speech is predicated. If we find that these facts the facts and the data upon which the gentleman's and these data are incorrect, that the honorable gentleman has been misled by the authorities on which he relied, we can easily find a solution of what would otherwise appear strange-even inexplicable, in view of the section of country which the honorable gentleman so ably represents, and the subject which formed the theme of his eloquent remarks.

I propose, then, sir, to follow the course of argument adopted by the gentleman from South Carolina. I shall endeavor to show that national honor, as well as national necessity, imperatively tlement of the long standing grievances and muldemand a prompt, definitive, and satisfactory settiplied and accumulated outrages which we have experienced at the hands of Spanish officials, and which we have already permitted to remain too long unredressed and unpunished. Sir, our national honor and our commercial rights are represented by every flag that floats in the breeze from

the mast-head of an American ship, no matter in what sea she may be found, or in what port she may choose to anchor. Insult that flag, and you insult the whole American people; you rouse a land which nothing can appease short of full, feeling throughout the length and breadth of the honorable, satisfactory, and prompt reparation. But we will come to this point presently!

The honorable gentleman charges, at the outset of his remarks, that a feverish impatience seems to be seizing upon our people for territorial extension, and to support this charge we are told that the people upon the northern frontier look with deep feeling to the annexation of the British provinces of North America. That, sir, is a question which these provinces must decide for themselves -one with which this country at this time has nothing whatever to do. When these provinces present themselves at the doors of Congress, asking for admission into our Confederacy of States, clothed with the attributes of sovereignty, and capable of treating on subjects of such grave importance, should I occupy a seat in this House, I shall act, I trust, as becomes an American Tegislator, and as a member of the great Democratic party of this nation. I shall be ready to extend the hand of friendship to every man who has passed through the fiery ordeal of oppression, and may desire to worship at the same altar of liberty with myself. I care not under what sun he may have been born-I shall ask not what tongue he speaks if his heart throbs for liberty, and he is worthy to enjoy it, I can greet him as a friend, and receive him as a brother.

But, sir, it may be owing to my obliquity of judgment, or to some obtuseness of comprehension, but, I confess that I am unable to discover the slightest analogy between the relative positions of Canada and Cuba towards the United States. When, sir, I would ask the gentleman from South Carolina, has our flag been insulted with impunity

33D CONG....2D SESS.

by the authorities of the North American provinces, our citizens immured in subterranean dungeons; despoiled of their property; shot down and publicly butchered by a brutal and ferocious soldiery, without trial, without a defense, without a hearing, contrary to every principle of international law, and in the very teeth of existing treaty stipulations. Tell me, sir, that these outrages have been perpetrated by British officials in North America; that our commerce has been crippled and paralyzed by odious exactions and onerous imposts, and that the very name of American, the proudest that man ever bore, is with them a by-word of insult and contumely; show me when these things, and such as these, can be charged by our Government upon the British authorities in the North American provinces, and I am ready to vote the last dollar in the Treasury to blockade their ports, take possession of their territory and hold it as an indemnification for the past, and a pledge for their good behavior in the future. Gentlemen may talk of the evils of extension, and preach didactic homilies to this House on the divine attributes of acquiescence and submission under insult and injury; but our honor as a sovereign and independent nation rises above all such considerations, and demands that neither should be imperiled by cowardly submission to wrong, of groundless apprehensions at dangers that have no real existence.

The whole argument of the honorable gentleman in reference to the dangers to be apprehended from territorial extension, however sound it may be on general principles, or however applicable under different forms of government from ours, has no relevancy, in my humble judgment, to our present position with respect to Cuba. I trust, sir, that I am as free from the spirit of filibustering as the gentleman from South Carolina. I am willing and ready to go as far as he who goes farthest in observing faithfully all our treaty stipulations-not only with Spain, but with all nations. If the inhabitants of Cuba are groaning under the weight of oppressive laws, and writhing under the lash of heartless despots, they have, in our own history, an example of what the "unconquerable will," the fixed resolve to die as freemen rather than live as slaves can accomplish, if they should strike for freedom and wrest the scepter from the tyrant's brow. In such a contest, it is true, they would have all the sympathies of my soul, and I doubt not that many of our more ardent and patriotic young countrymen would be found fighting, side by side, with the Cuban patriot, willing to share with him all the disasters and the perils the occasion might bring forth. But as a nation we would have no right to interfere we could do no more than we did on similar occasions-be the first to acknowledge the independence of their country, so soon as that independence shall be fairly won. Should such ever be the condition of things in Cuba: should her patriot sons ever rise in their strength and crush the tyrant power that has so long enslaved them, and then formally apply to be received into our Confederacy, the time will have arrived for the gentleman from South Carolina, should he occupy a seat on this floor, to expatiate on the evils of territorial extension, and calculate, with such mathematical precision, the number of human beings that can comfortably subsist upon an acre of ground.

But, sir, let us suppose that Cuba has thrown off the Spanish yoke, established her independence, and asked to be admitted into the American

Union. The honorable member meets the application with an objection on which he seemed to lay much stress, namely, that the admission of Cuba would paralyze the vast slave interest at the South engaged in raising sugar. This, sir, is a fallacy, and, I regret to add, a somewhat popular one. The sugar-growing region of the South, and the slave interest engaged in that pursuit, would be immeasurably benefited by such an acquisition. Such, at least, is the opinion of those who have examined this subject carefully and practically; whose opportunities for acquiring correct information have been ample, and whose interests, and feelings, and sympathies are all identified with the sugar-growing interests of Louisiana. I will quote from an article on this subject which appeared in De Bow's Review for July, 1854, from NEW SERIES.-No. 13.

"The establishment of a free Government in Cuba could not produce any immediate prejudice to the sugar planting interest of Louisiana, for it would not distrust in any way the fiscal protection which the present tariff extends to it. States of this Union which is supposed to nurture disaster It is the subsequent admission of that Island as one of the and ruin for the sugar planters of Louisiana." *** “But I do not entertain the belief that this event is pregnant with ruin, or even with injury to the sugar planting interests of this State; and to such as suppose that such a result would follow the admission of Cuba into the Union, I would suggest the following reflections:

"The product of sugar to the acre in Cuba, differs very slightly from that in Louisiana, while the difference in the amount produced per hand, is even less than the difference of product to the acre, and is probably in favor of the Louisiana planter, from his improved system of culture, and better care and feeding of his hands.

"The great elements of the less cost of production of sugar in Cuba than in this country, consist in the superior cheapness of labor, and the lower value of land there. The average value of field hands in Cuba is $500, while in Louisiana their value is $1200! and the mean value of land is well known to be far less than here. In these great items consist almost the entire advantage which the planter of Cuba possesses over him of Louisiana. In other respects,

he labors under disadvantages; for instance, the cost of his supplies, which is greater, from his greater distance from their place of production.

"The first great result of the establishment of a free Government in Cuha, or of its admission to this Confederacy, would be the immediate cessation of the African slave trade, and the appreciation in value of the slaves there, consequent upon the cutting off of this source of cheap supply. Next in the scale of economic results attending the admission of Cuba to the Union, would be the equalization of the value of slaves. They could not remain at an average value of $500 there, while they bore that of $1,200 in Louisiana, isted. Such an equalization in the value of labor in this country and in Cuba, would contribute, in a great degree, to an equalization of the cost of production of sugar in each, increasing it in Cuba and diminishing it in Louisiana, in the exact proportion of its effects upon the value of labor respectively.

and freedom of intercourse between the two countries ex

*

*

The increase in the cost of production of this staple in Cuba would afford a far more permanent and efficient protection to the sugar planter of Louisiana than the present fiscal impost upon sugar, while, so long as Cuba is enabled to produce it at less cost than Louisiana, and the desire in the North to obtain cheap sugar exists, the danger to the sugar planting interest in this country will not only remain,

but continue to increase."

But, sir, so far from paralyzing, or even injuriously affecting, the sugar-growing interests of Louisiana, I think I can demonstrate that the admission of Cuba into our Union will prove the best, and, perhaps, the only measure that will confer stability upon the culture of the sugar-cane in that State, and promote the permanent welfare of its planting interests.

We have had official information that the Spanish Government, instigated, beyond all rational doubt, by British diplomacy have, during the past few years, been devising every imaginable scheme to increase the supply of labor in the Island of Cuba at every hazard. European, Indian, and Asiatic laborers have, from time to time, been introduced to that end, and the authorities of the Island have even officially declared that, if the planters of the Island will sustain them in the measure, they will introduce, in one year, one hundred thousand negroes, who shall be apprenticed out, as the wants of the planters may require, for a series of years, and at prices merely nominal. In the mean time every encouragement is given to the slave trade; and here I would take occasion to thank the honorable gentleman for his admission that, notwithstanding the treaty of 1817 between England and Spain, Africans in vast numbers have been imported into Cuba. Yes, sir, they have been imported into Cuba; they are at this day imported, and they will continue to be imported— for it is the secret and settled policy of Spain to cheapen labor in Cuba as much as possible-until hat Providence which watches over the destinies of men, and of nations, shall interpose the stars and stripes of our Union to put a stop to this nefarious traffic.

But to return. Let us suppose this policy to be successful, and the cost of labor to be reduced by it to $200 per hand, (and this is the ultimum fixed upon by the Spanish officials in Cuba,) what

on sugar, under the tariff act of 1846, afford the Louisiana planter against the almost costless sugar of Cuba? The writer, whose able reflections on this subject I have cited, justly and truly remarks that, under such a condition of things, "five years. of such competition would suffice to ruin every sugar planter in the State of Louisiana." "They would," he continues, "follow the coffee planters of Cuba in poverty to the grave." The gentleman from South Carolina may, therefore, dismiss all fears as respects the sugar planting interests of Louisiana. If he has at heart, as I am sure he has, the true welfare and interest of that State, he will never have a better opportunity than now to convince the world of that fact. Let him lend his powerful influence, and exert his superior acquisition of Cuba, and annexing it to this union, talents in facilitating, in every honorable way, the and he will contribute in making his country the great sugar market of the world; Louisiana and Cuba, as neighboring and sister States, encouraging and stimulating each other in the arts of commerce and industrial progress, and both fulfilling their high destiny as two of the brightest stars in our galaxy of States.

There was one portion of the speech of the gentleman from South Carolina, to which, I must confess, I listened with mingled emotions of surprise and regret. I cannot believe that the gentleman designed to reflect upon our Government because it has been compelled, in self-defense, to adopt a retaliatory policy with respect to Spanish vessels entering the ports of the United States. But the language used by the honorable gentleman admits, in my humble opinion, of no other construction. I quote from the speech, as printed in the Globe, of this city. In referring to the onerous and discriminating regulations which prevail in Cuba against the commerce of the United States, the gentleman holds the following language:

"Under the influence of our acts of 1832 and 1834, the imports into Cuba, in Spanish vessels, from the United States, amounted, in 1849, to only $11,000, whereas the imports from England for the same period, in Spanish vessels, amounted to $4,345,300. That this striking difference is mainly attributable to our own regulations, is obvious, from the fact that England stands on no more favored footing in reference to the commercial regulations of Cuba than the United States, except her freedom from our own enact

ments."

Here it is distinctly charged that the discriminations and restrictions with which our commerce has so long been fettered in Cuban ports, are attributable to our own regulations. Surely, if this assertion can be borne out by facts, our Government must have been strangely infatuated, if not culpably reckless, in adopting a line of policy so disastrous to the commercial interests of the whole country, and particularly of the South.

But let us examine this question. What, I would ask the gentleman from South Carolina, was the condition of our commercial relations with Spain and her colonies prior to 1832? Were not our vessels virtually driven from their ports by unjust and prohibitory discriminating duties? If the gentleman from South Carolina will take the trouble to examine the documents now on file in this House, he will find that such was the case, and I would especially refer him to House document No. 163, Twenty-Seventh Congress, second session. This document will inform him that our own regulations, so far from being aggressive, were forced upon our Government as a measure of self defense, and proved to be the means of compelling Spain to abolish her prohibitory policy as respects the United States. On page 19 of this document the gentleman will find that there is a wide difference of opinion between himself and the Department of State, from which that document emanated, with respect both to the policy and effect of these regulations. If the gentleman should not be able to put his hands on this document, I will quote a few lines from it for his benefit:

"The tonnage duties upon vessels of the United States, formerly enormous, were, in 1832, under the action of eountervailing duties, redued to five cents per ton-the same which Spanish vessels pay in ports of the United States."

And on page 20, he will find another illustration of this policy-if not a justification even of measures more rigorous than those adopted by our Government in 1832 and 1834:

"One important restriction "is imposed on vessels of

33D CONG....1ST SESS.

the United States, to which English, French, and Danish vessels are not subject, viz: Masters of United States vessels are not permitted to make post entries on their manifests, should the cargo actually on board exceed, from any chance, the amount expressed. This is not only derogatory to the United States in a national sense, but is injurious to the interest of the merchant, any excess in the cargo over the manifest, from whatever cause arising, being liable to confiscation."

If under such circumstances as these, and I have adverted to but few of the restrictions placed upon our commerce by the Spanish Government, Congress should have deemed it to be its duty to devise some means for the protection of our merchants from plunder, and our flag from insult, the motives of that body should at least be under stood, before its action is so severely criticised. Would the gentleman submit to such unequal terms in his own individual dealings with his fellow man, in whom he recognized no title of superiority, and no claim to his submission?

But I can best illustrate the necessity which dictated the acts of 1832 and 1834, by referring to an actual case of shipment of merchandise from New Orleans to Havana, under the restrictive policy which, to this day with scarcely any diminution of its hardships upon our merchants, characterizes the Government of Cuba, with respect to our commerce In the month of November 1841, a vessel of the United States, registered one hundred and forty tons, entered the port of Havana with the following manifest of cargo, shipped at New Orleans: 650 barrels of flour, 28,292 pounds of lard, 8,400 pounds of hams, and 1 sofa.

Estimated cost of cargo in New Orleans: 650 barrels of flour at $6 per parrel... 28,292 pound lard at 6c. per pound......... 8,400 pounds hams at 6c. per pound.... 1 sofa......

Total.........

$3,900 00 1,697 52 504 03 20 00 $6,121 52

In reference to the state of things which this case exhibits, the Department of State very curtly observes the restriction imposed on the commerce of the United States particularly, is a sagacious policy on the part of those having the control of the commercial relations of those islands." sentence, sir, pregnant with meaning.

A

Sir, if our Government, or any Government, should submit to this state of things without an effort, at least, at retaliation, it would betray a degree of forbearance or pusillanimity equally unworthy a people capable of appreciating their rights.

But, sir, let us see what are these regulations to which the gentleman from South Carolina ascribes our failure to establish reciprocity of commerce with the Island of Cuba. In the United States Statutes at Large, vol. iv., p. 579, we find the act of 1832, to which the gentleman referred. I will read it:

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That no other or greater duty of tonnage be levied in the ports of the United States on vessels owned wholly by subjects of Spain, coming from a port in Spain, than shall, by the Secretary of the Treasury, be ascertained to have been paid on American vessels in the ports of Spain previous to the 20th of October, 1817.

"SEC. 2. Spanish colonial vessels to pay the same tonnage duty as American vessels in Spanish colonial ports. "SEC. 3. Provision in case any foreign nation should abolIsh its discriminating duties on American vessels,"

"SEC. 1. Spanish vessels from Cuba or Porto Rico to pay a tonnage duty equal to discriminating duty on American bottoms.

"SEC. 5. Resolved, &c., That whenever the President of the United States shall be satisfied that the discriminating duties in favor of Spanish bottoms, levied upon the cargoes of American vessels in the ports of Cuba and Porto Rico, have been abolished, or whenever, in his opinion, a satisfactory arrangement upon the subject of the said duties shall have been made between the United States and Spain, the President is hereby authorized to declare the same by proclamation; and thereupon this act shall cease to have any further force or effect."

eight and one half per cent.

We will now institute a similar analysis of the articles usually supplied by England, directly or indirectly, and of the duties thereon, in Cuba: Broadcloths, superfine, one and a half yards

wide, first and second class per yard. ..$5.00 .....70c. One and a half yard wide, third class per yard 300... Ordinary do., per yard.. Silk cloth, per yard.

Muslin, wide or narrow, plain or figured, per yard.....

Table knives and forks, with pearl, ivory, tortoise shell, or plated handles, per dozen...

Do. common per dozen.

.....

..49c. 1 25......26c. 75......14c.

1 75......17c.

10 00...... .84c. 3 00......37c.

I had intended to show that the gentleman was also led, by the authorities which he consulted, into other errors, but as I have already detained the committee longer than it is my habit to do, I will content myself by selecting one of those errors as an illustration of the rest.

The gentleman in referring to the excess of importations from England into Cuba over those from the United States, says: "that England stands on no more favored footing in reference to the commercial regulations of Cuba than the United States, except her freedom from our own enactments." It is my misfortune to differ from the honorable gentleman in his conclusions on this subject. I deny that such is the case at this time, or that such has ever been the case, unless, indeed, during a time of war between Spain and England. France, and England, and every coun try that has a merchant marine enjoys commercial privileges which are denied to the United States, and is exempt from restrictions which are imposed upon us.

have carefully examined official documents giving the amount of imports and exports to and from Cuba and the United States for a number of years past, and a rigid analysis of the several artiches of merchandise which have constituted the totals of the trade between the two countries, and the duties to which our exports to Cuba are subject, gives as a result the average amount of duties paid by England and the United States respectively, on their chief products exported to that island. These calculations, which I have carefully examined, give as a result an average duty of forty-eight and a haf per cent. on the chief products of the United States exported to Cuba, against twelve per cent. charged upon the products of England. But, as the documents which I have consulted may not be accessible to the honorable gentleman, I will again tresspass on the patience of the committee by referring to the tables from which I have derived my conclusion:

Duties in Cuba on articles supplied by the United States.

But, perhaps the gentleman from South Carolina may contend that the restrictions of 1842 have yielded to a more liberal policy in 1855. Quite the contrary, sir; instead of any relaxation of these onerous and insulting discriminations in favor of England, and against the United States, the present imposts on our commerce are even more unjust and oppressive, and the existing fiscal regulations in the different ports of Cuba more stringent and prohibitory.

This proposition I can demonstrate in a few words. The average of imports to Cuba for three years, 1848, 1849, and 1850, was: flour, 234,264 barrels; lard, 10,168.595 pounds; olive oil, 8,451,900 gallons; beef, dry and wet, 502,825 pounds; pork, dry and wet, 1,434,778 pounds; jerked beef, 30,556,950 pounds; hams, 2,047,406 pounds; butter, 685,349 pounds.

Let us now see whence the above articles were imported, and at what rate of duty:

From United States.
Flour, 5,642 barrels
Lard, 10,193,370 pounds........
Olive oil.

Beef, 359.161 pounds....
Pork, 1,322,655 pounds...
Jerked beef......
Horns, 1.228,443 pounds.
Butter, 619,107 pounds....

....

From other places. Flour, 228,002 barrels..... Lard, 121,225 pounds Olive oil, 8,451,900 pounds Beef, 143,664 pounds.. Pork, 112,123 pounds.... Jerked beef, 39,566,990 pounds.. Horns, 818.963 pounds.... Butter, 66,252 pounds.............

Duty.

.$10 81 per barrel.

4 30 per 101 pounds. 2 87 per 10 pounds. 1 75 per 10 pounds.

2 86 per 1014 pounds. 1 96 per 101 pounds. 3 58 per 101 pounds. 4 77 per 101 ponnds. Duty.

$2 52 per barrel.

4 30 per 1011 pounds. 57 per 101 pounds. 1 75 per 101 pounds. 2 16 per 101 pounds. 1 17 per 10 pounds.

3 58 per 101 pounds. 4 77 per 101 pounds.

I am indebted to the same distinguished authority referred to at the commencement of these remarks, for these tables; and so unanswerable are the views which the writer takes of this whole subject, and so diametrically opposed are they to those of the honorable gentleman from South Carolina, that I cannot forbear quoting another passage from the able article already adverted to:

"Here we find that unequal fiscal impositions change the natural current of trade; and that flour, instead of being brought from the cheapest mart in the world, is sought on the other side of the Atlantic; that olive oil of the most inferior quality is enabled to compete largely with lard, for domestic purposes; and that of 34,581,959 pounds of meats consumed, only 2,890,259 pounds, or a fraction over eight per cent., is imported from the United States. Butter and pork, being subject to an equality of fiscal exactions, are imported to the extent of more than ninety per cent. from this country."

And in the face of such facts and figures as these, the honorable gentleman gravely tells this committee, and the country, that we are on "s "an equal footing" with England in our commercial intercourse with the Island of Cuba. I fear but few will think as he does on this subject-1 am sure my constituents will not. If, however, the honorable gentleman should still continue to be skeptical on this point, I would commend to his careful perusal a most interesting document which emanated from the Spanish Court at Madrid, in the year 1839, and dignified with the high sounding title of a royal decree. This morceau of diplomatic civility towards the United States bears date 19th January, 1839, and a very brief extract will suffice to portray the spirit of the whole: "It is particularly recommended to the Governors of the American Colonies (to be by them communicated to the