Page images
PDF
EPUB

33D CONG....2D Sess.

subordinate authorities) to treat the subjects of the English and Frenen nations with all the consideration which may be compatible with nation I dero um, procuring, before procecdin against one of the subjects of those nations, convincing proof of their guilt, and the degree thereof; always avoiding measures which may call for indemnity of damages; for, needing in the present critical state of affairs the powerful aid of both these nations, it is just to accord them every consideration. The authorities are held strictly responsible for the fulfillment of this order."

Will the gentleman from South Carolina point to any incident, any expression of good will, similar to this in the entire history of our relations with Spain? Think you,,sir, that if the gallant Crittenden, and his brave compatriots, could have referred the Butcher Concha to such a document in favor of the United States, that their blood would have deluged the streets of Havana, and their

bodies have been mutilated and mangled by a brutal and ferocious soldiery? No, sir; the mis

creants who acted as Concha's executioners on that revolting occasion would never have satiated their demoniac thirst for the blood of American citizens-"the authorities would see to the fulfillment of the order."

There are many other points in the gentleman's speech which I would desire to notice, did time permit. I will leave them to others, who, no doubt, will do them ample justice. My main object in taking the floor is accomplished. I desired only to afford the gentleman from South Carolina an opportunity of revising his facts, and of procuring some more reliable authorities than those from which he derived impressions so manifestly at war with the realities of the past twentyfive years.

Duty on Railroad Iron-Mr. Brodhead.

to be. She knows also the value, commercially, of such an acquisition to our southern territory. She is not ignorant of its importance to us in a military point of view, and hence her fears, and her jealousies, and her half concealed hostility to the American Union, and her underground diplomacy with the Cabinet of Spain. England knows what nature, and nature's God has done for that which spring forth spontaneously from her soilwestern Eden. Rich in all the varied productions

salubrious in climate-exhaustless in her natural resources-she needs but the influence of American institutions, and the progressive spirit of American enterprise to raise her to a condition that would challenge the admiration of the world. Under her present rotten and despotic system of Government-her industry paralyzed-her spirit galled and broken-her sons enslaved, and her soil neglected, it is almost incredible that she could retain even a breath of commercial vitality. And yet her commerce, restricted and fettered as it is, exhibits annual returns perfectly astounding.

In 1851, her imports amounted to $32,311,430, and her exports to $31,341,683. In 1852 her imports reached the sum of $29,780,242, and her exports $27,453,936, and in 1853 she imported merchandise to the amount of $27,789,800, while her exports reached as high as $31,210,405. Of this latter sum the products of the island covered $30,328,320. The remaining $882,084 was the amount of foreign products exported during that year. Figures would fail to calculate the commercial greatness of that island, if she could only take her rank in this great Confederacy of States. Nature has stamped upon her soil her long neglected claim to this proud distinction, and the hour is hastening when that claim must be recognized. The perfidy of her rulers, the duplicity of their advisers, and in the patriotic and eloquent language of President Pierce, in his inaugural address, when referring to this subject, "the preservation of the rights of commerce and the peace of the world," demand that no more time shall be lost in useless diplomacy, or in fruitless efforts to vindicate our rights.

At the opening of my remarks, I said that the acquisition of Cuba, by the United States, was demanded alike by our national honor and our national safety. I need not, at this day, recapitulate the grievances and the acts of official tyranny to which our citizens visiting Havana have been so long and so repeatedly subjected. I have been informed that the documents setting forth these outrages, now on file in the appropriate department of our Government would, of themselves, make up a volume. No reparation has yet been made, no apology offered, no indemnity for the past, and no guarantee for the future. It is not for me to ask what course our Government proposes to adopt, in view of this state of things. Should our late minister to Madrid, now on his return home, inform the country, as he doubtless will, that Spain obstinately refuses to accord any satisfactory reparation for the wrongs inflicted on our commerce, and the indignities offered to our flag by Spanish minions in Cuba; that the cabinet at Madrid hurls defiance at our Government, and haughtily plants itself upon the declaration of Lord Clarendon, that the recent treaty between England and France looked beyond the eastern continent; what, it may be asked, under such circumstances, will be the course of the Government of the United States? I, sir, have too much confidence in the zealous and patriotic solicitude of President Pierce, in everything that can affect our honor abroad or our interest at home to entertain, much less express, any doubts on this subject. There is only one fear that gives me uneasiness, and that is, that our ardent and patriotic young men of the South-animated by those noble and chivalrous impulses which ever lead them to succor the oppressed, and justified by the unredressed insults which we have so long borne with a degree of forbearance almost amounting to dishonor-may not longer brook the tardiness of diplomatic forms, but, seizing upon the first favorable moment, anticipate what, sooner or later, must inevitably be the course-the only course which our Government can adopt. We cannot, as a nation, if we desire to command the respect of the SPEECH OF HON. R. BRODHEAD,

world, submit much longer to Cuban insolence.

Sir, I am opposed to any further half way measures. The repeal of the neutrality laws, would, in my judgment, belong to such a category. The effect of such a measure would be to stimulate and legalize the spirit of filibusterism, and bring, perhaps, merited rebuke upon our Government. Our true course, indeed, the only course we can adopt consistently with our pro fessions, and creditably to our Government, is to send a sufficient naval force to the Island of Cuba; blockade her ports; take possession of her territory in the name of justice, and hold on to it in the name of freedom. Providence will do the rest. I am willing to trust to its wise and beneficent dispensations. Then, sir, will Cuba become what God designed she should betyranny, oppression, the lash, the dungeon, and the horrible garrote will disappear, and peace, prosperity, the arts of civilized life, education, public virtue, and universal happiness shall smile and reign throughout that Heaven favored isle. In the language of one of her own gifted and patriotic sons, "Cuba will then find peace and consolation, strength and protection, justice and freedom; and resting upon these solid foundations, will, in a short time, exhibit to the world, the portentous spectacle of a people rising from the most profound degradation and passing, with the rapidity of the lightning's flash, to the highest point of great

ness.

[ocr errors]

DUTY ON RAILROAD IRON.

OF PENNSYLVANIA,

IN THE SENATE, February 8, 1855. The Senate having under consideration the bill granting to Railroad Companies three years in which to pay the Duties on Iron imported for Railroad purposes—

It is needless for gentlemen to say that England has no motive or desire to interfere in our diplomatic relations with the Government of Spain. She has every motive that national selfishness and commercial rivalry can inspire. She looks forward to the day when that island, under the policy which she has long been dictating to the Spanish court, shall become thoroughly African- Although not very well prepared I feel it to be ized; and well she knows how disastrous, how my duty to submit a few remarks on the subject fatal to the interests and institutions of the South, now under consideration. Notwithstanding the such a condition of things would inevitably proveable and ingenious argument which the Senator

Mr. BRODHEAD said:

SENATE.

from Tennessee [Mr. JONES] has just presented, I cannot yield my assent to the measure. I think it is violative of principle, and of the settled revenue policy of the Government. It is unjust and ungenerous-though not so intended by the Senator, and ultimately it will be injurious to the consumers of railroad iron themselves.

Before proceeding, Mr. President, to sustain these propositions, I have a few preliminary remarks to make in reply to some points made by my friend from Tennessee. For several years. past it has been evident that the railroad interest is one of the most powerful combinations of capital and energy in this country. I find that in New York there have been meetings of railroad gentlemen who propose to send committees here, and one of their committees has issued a circular in which they call upon the different railroad companies to furnish them with a contribution of $100 each; and to give them five per cent. on the amount of the duties which may be remitted.

At a meeting held in Richmond on the 5th and 6th December, of all the State proxies, presidents, directors, chief engineers, and superintendents in the State, the following resolution, offered by a Mr. Garnett, was passed:

"Resolved, That we do urge on our Senators and Representatives in Congress the propriety of taking prompt measures to secure the passage of an act to refund to railroad companies all duties paid by them on railroad iron since March 4, 1851, and to reduce the duty on railroad iron hereafter imported."

Well, sir, these Virginia gentlemen request their Senators and Representatives to adopt "prompt measures" to take about $12,000,000 from the public Treasury and give it to railroad companies; and I would like to know in what part of the Constitution they can find authority for so doing. Money collected, and in the public Treasury, becomes the property of the people of the United States, and we have no right to pay it out in the way indicated in the resolution. It is a most extraordinary resolution to come from a State which has always advocated a strict construction of the Constitution, and opposed anything like a system of internal improvement upon the part of the Federal Government. I might enlarge upon this point, but do not think it necessary. I only allude to the fact for the purpose of showing that there must be a very great outside pressure when such a resolution comes up from "Old Virginia.

[ocr errors]

Such, Mr. President, is the powerful interest which is formed throughout the country to put down one great branch of American industry for the benefit of railroad corporations and railroad companies; and these gentlemen, according to the New York circular, are to have five per cent, upon all the duties they may succeed in causing to be remitted.

Mr. HUNTER. Does the Senator mean to say that the gentlemen who signed that memorial are to have five per cent.?

Mr. BRODHEAD. By no means. I allude to the circular which is signed by five gentlemen in New York. I have it here.

Mr. SEWARD. Read it.

Mr. BRODHEAD. The circular is dated New York, March 21, 1854; and among other things, it says:

"To make provisions for the expenses unavoidably incident to the prosecution of the measure, it was agreed at the meeting that each company coming into the arrange. ment should advance for this purpose the sum of $100; and that, in case of success, there should be paid by cach company to the committee, for the further expenses that may be incurred, and as a compensation for their time and services, (in addition to the above advance,) five per cent. on the amount of duty remitted, or which may be saved to such company, on railroad iron heretofore imported by it, or which it may import or contract for prior to July 1, 1855, by the passage of the law or laws repealing, remitting, or suspending for a limited time, the duty on such iron."`

The circular is signed: S. F. Vinton, Noah S. Wilson, John Stryker, Geo. Ashmun, H. V. Poor, committee.

It will be seen that I was correct in saying that they are to have an allowance of five per centum paid on railroad iron per annum amounts to beon the amount that may be remitted. The duty tween $3 000,000 and $4,000,000; hence these gentlemen will receive, if they succeed, about$200,000.. In alluding to this, I do not intend to intimate that any Senator, or member of the House of Representatives, would be improperly influenced. I use it for the purpose of showing that there is a com

[ocr errors]

33D CONG....2D SESS.

bination of capital and energy for the purpose of obtaining a suspension or the entire repeal of the duties on railroad iron; and, Mr. President, say what you please about the measure now under consideration, which proposes to give a credit of three years upon the duties on railroad iron, it is a proposition to take off the duty. The duties on railroad iron for the last three years have been, and for the next three years will be, about $12,000,000; and that amount will be remitted under this bill, for, though bonds may be given, the amount will never be collected. We all know that. It is, therefore, a proposition to give a bonus of $12,000,000 to those who are now engaged in constructing railroads. If that is proper, why not return the $12,000,000 to those who have constructed railroads within the last three years? Surely, sir, if those who are now about to construct railroads, when the price of railroad iron is from fifteen to twenty dollars less per ton than it was last year, are to be relieved to the amount of $12,000,000, those who have paid the duty when the price was high, have an equal or a superior claim upon your justice to the amount which they have paid; and those who have laid their roads with American rails will also have an equitable right to ask for the amount per mile of duties on foreign iron which will be given to other companies if this bill should pass.

The honorable Senator from Tennessee alleges that, if the railroad companies are not relieved, the great railroad interests will be seriously affected. Now, sir, who are entitled to the most consideration at the hands of Congress-those 'who are engaged in a great branch of American industry, or those who have been engaged in giving their bonds in Europe for railroad iron? Those who are engaged in the railroad interests of the coun try are not entitled to especial and particular favor at the hands of Congress, for they have brought the crisis upon us. They have given their.bonds in Europe for railroad iron, running up, to a fearful amount, the foreign indebtedness against us. Thus, they have withdrawn our specie from other legitimate branches of commerce; and now they propose to issue other bonds, that they may pass their iron through the custom-house without the payment of the duties.

How is it with those who are engaged in the manufacture of iron, and especially of railroad iron? This is the second proposition of this kind which has been made. In 1844, it was made by a then Senator from Maine, and why? Because there were no persons engaged in the manufacture of railroad iron in this country. That was the great argument then used; but, sir, in 1845 that great enterprise was commenced here. quired skill, it required labor, it required great energy, it required a large amount of capital, and $10,000,000 have been invested in it. That is a high sum to be invested in so brief a period in a new and hazardous business. In five years more I have no doubt the amount will be doubled, besides the increased amount required to be invested in furnaces.

It re

The Senator from Tennessee says that unless this relief be granted, the great railroad enterprise will have to stop. I tell him, sir, that the great enterprise which has been engaged in this country in making railroad iron will have to stop if he succeeds. What will be the effect? He informed the Senate that, from 1824 to 1844, almost all the railroads in the older States were constructed. That is true, but they paid much higher for their iron when there was no duty on it than the honorable Senator can purchase it for now. They were pioneers in this great enterprise; those who are now engaged in it are mere imitators. Those who engaged in it in my own State, at an early day, paid down their money and their capital; they risked it all; but how is it now with those who are engaged in making railroads? Why, sir, they attempt to do it by "kiting" on bonds given for their railroad iron, on bonds given at the customhouse, and on bonds given to contractors. That is what has produced this state of affairs in the country.

In the spring of 1853, I undertook, in a few remarks which I then submitted the Senate, to foretell the present state of things, and to arrest the railroad mania by exhibiting the balance sheet. I submitted a resolution calling upon the Secre

[ocr errors]

Duty on Railroad Iron-Mr. Brodhead.

tary of the Treasury to furnish the Senate, at its
meeting in December, 1853, with the amount of our
foreign indebtedness. He did so, and look at the
fearful result which has been run up against us by
these railroad companies, draining from us our
gold and silver. Is it wise for an individual or a
nation to contract large debts? If a nation does
so, what is the result? An exportation of gold
and silver larger than the importation. Does not
that lessen the ability to do business, and conse-
quently the productive power of the country? Is
not gold and silver the only basis for legitimate
banking? Is not a good currency the life-blood
of the body politic?

SENATE.

and other recently discovered deposits in England can be found in Mr. Blackwell's lecture on the iron making resources of the United Kingdom. The lecture was delivered in 1853. With what extraor dinary energy these resources have been turned to account, the following extract of a letter written to a friend of mine, by Professor Wilson, who was in this country in 1853, and who has recently been appointed Professor of Agriculture in the University of Edinburgh, will show. His letter bears date the 5th of September, 1854:

"In the iron manufacture here, all is thriving and increasing enormously in production. The oolite beds have proved most valuable. Indeed, already in the Cleveland district there are about seventy to eighty large furnaces either in work or in progress, equal to a make of something like five hundred thousand tons per annum. In Staffordshire, too, where both ores and fuel were getting scanty, large deposits of both have recently been hit upon in Cannock Chase. These have quite revived the midland iron masters."

The annual production in Great Britain is about two million seven hundred thousand tons. During the last year, more than seventy new furnaces have been put up there, which will afford an addition of over five hundred thousand tons. So that the product in England is almost equal to the entire demand of the whole world. When that market is pressed upon, the price of iron becomes high, and when that market is abstained from, it be comes cheap; so that whenever we cease to manufacture iron in this country under a proper competition tariff, we have to pay more for it in England. Since 1845, millions of dollars have been invested by our own citizens in the enterprise of getting skilled labor, and carrying on the business of making railroad iron, and they now produce one hundred and sixty thousand tons of a first rate article, (and they will, in a few years, produce twice that amount, if not legislated out of

The total amount of railroad stocks was $309,893,967; the total amount of railroad bonds was $170,111,552. The total amount of stocks and bonds was $480,005,519. Railroad stocks held by foreigners amounted to $8,244,000; and railroad bonds held by foreigners amounted to $43,888,752; making stocks and bonds held by foreigners $52,132,752; and that is a mere approximation. This is the amount of foreign indebtedness upon railroad account alone. The whole amount of foreign indebtedness is over $225,000,000, according to the documents to which I have before referred. Yes, sir, the amount of indebtedness on railroad account is much larger than I have stated, because many of the city and corporation bonds which were held abroad were issued on the railroad account for the purpose of constructing railroads. These railroad corporations, therefore, have deranged the currency. The honorable Senator from Tennessee says, if you pass this bill, a thousand miles and more of railroads will be constructed than otherwise would be. Sir, we have been constructing our roads too fast; it has withdrawn capital from other enterprises. We ought not to construct, in this country-the legitimate wants of the country do not require-existence,) which comes in competition with the more than twenty-five hundred miles per annum. Mr. President, the bill does not propose that the credit shall be given on the railroad iron imported for first tracks only. It goes the whole figure, and extends to railroad iron, imported for second tracks, for repairs, and spikes, and chairs connected with them. If it was confined to first tracks, it would not be so objectionable.

The iron interests of this country have now as hard times as those who are engaged in constructing railroads. Will you interfere? If you do, I claim special legislation for the great iron interest, aswell as for the great railroad interest. A nation is great, prosperous, and progressive, in proportion to the iron which is manufactured and consumed. A classic German writer has said that, "The preparation of iron has become the most essential branch of industry by the immediate benefit it gives to the producer, the general benefits it yields to society, and the advantages it offers to the consumer. But the honorable Senator from Tennessee informs us that this bill will not injure the iron interest generally, because the manufacturers of iron will turn their attention to making other articles, and will not engage in making railroad iron. How is that?

[ocr errors]

In the year 1854, about one hundred and sixty thousand tons of railroad iron were manfactured in this country. In that business there was a capital invested of $10,000,000. They consumed over two hundred thousand tons of pig iron, eight hundred thousand tons of coal, and over two hundred thousand tons of limestone; so that there is a large amount of iron used in the manufacture of the rails. The iron business of this country will have a hard time of it for years to come. I doubt whether it will ever be a money-making business. Railroad companies make much more money, as I can show by statistics which I have on my table, than those who are engaged in the manufacture of iron, and it will continue to be so; because, in 1852, it was supposed that all the available spots for making iron in Great Britain had been occupied. Here is an important fact, to which I wish to call the attention of the Senate: In 1852, it was supposed that all the available spots for making iron in Great Britain had been occupied, but in that year a new discovery of ore was made on the east coast of England, where heretofore no iron industry had existed. In the oolitic formation of the Cleveland Hills, an immense deposite of iron stone was found. A minute description of these

English article. If this competition be broken down by such a measure as this, the effect can easily be seen.

Mr. President, I stated in the commencement of my remarks that this measure was contrary to principle and the settled revenue policy of the country. It is a proposition not to relieve the people from taxation by a reduction of duties, but to give a bonus to railroad corporations, and indirectly embark the Federal Government in a system of internal improvement. It is a well-known fact that most of our revenue is derived from the duties imposed on iron, broadcloths, woolen goods, silks, and sugar. Will any gentleman tell me why the duty should be taken off railroad iron, and not off woolen goods or sugar? You receive about the same amount of revenue from sugar duties that you do from duties on iron of all kinds. Can any one give a reason why the duty should be taken off railroad iron, and retained on sugar, which is an article of general consumption? Why not extend the same privilege to the consumers of woolen goods? Why do not those who use salt, sugar and woolen goods ask this favor at our hands? It is because capital is not combined for the purpose. There are no large corporations, such as these railroad companies, to press such a measure with the influence of capital. When you get the duties taken off these articles, how are you to get your revenue?

I know, sir, there are many gentlemen who are for absolute free trade, or for the lowest duties; but they are the men who always vote the largest appropriations; and that is a very good way to get popular. During the war of 1812 there was a member of Congress who voted for the war, who voted for the largest supplies, the largest number of men, and the highest pay; but who would never vote for a dollar of taxation. "Liberal appropriation and no taxation" was his motto. It is very easy to become popular by proposing not to tax the people at all; and give them all the money they ask.

Sir, this is a proposition for class legislation, to build up the railroad interest at the expense of one of the great manufacturing interests of this country, which, it seems to me, is not sustainable on any ground of justice or policy. It is violative of one great principle of taxation-to impose the burdens of the Government on all alike. Why should you make the poor man who wears broadcloth or woolen goods pay duty on those articles, and not

33D CONG....2D SESS.

tax the gentleman who rides on railroads? This proposition is unjust to those who have heretofore constructed railroads; because it will enable those who construct them now to derive advantages which have not been extended to others. Iron can now be obtained for a less price than formerly. The duty has not heretofore varied the price, it has been supply and demand. From 1832 to 1842, when there was no duty, the iron was higher than it is now, with a duty of thirty per centum. Railroad iron was never so cheap as under the thirty per centum act of 1846, and never so high as when it came in free of duty.

Mr. WELLER. I wish to ask my friend from Pennsylvania a question. He seems to have devoted a good deal of time to the examination of this subject, and he has no doubt acquired all the information that is necessary to put the Senate in possession of the facts. Now, I desire to know from him how many manufacturers there are in the United States of railroad iron, and how many persons are employed in its manufacture? My object is to get at the number of persons interested in keeping up the present high duty upon railroad iron.

[blocks in formation]

At the present time the best rails can be bought for fifteen or twenty dollars per ton less than at this time last year. Is not this a large decline in one year? Does not this reduction weigh heavily upon our manufacturers, without adopting a measure like this the effect of which will be ruinous to them?

I have intimated that the manufacture of railroad iron in this country is not only a great enterprise, and, if not broken down by adverse legislation, would become a great branch of industry alike beneficial to the producer and consumer. On the first day of January, 1855, there were twenty-one thousand three hundred and ten miles of railroad actually constructed and open for public use in the United States. Upon most of the roads, English rails of an inferior quality have been used. The number of miles opened for public use during the last four years, is as follows: In 1851, one thousand two hundred and seventy-eight were opened; in 1852, two thousand two hundred and eighty-two; in 1853, three thousand nine hundred and sixty-four, and in 1854, three thousand five hundred and ninety-nine. It takes about one hundred tons of railroad iron to make a mile of

Mr. BRODHEAD. I will endeavor to accommodate my friend from California. In 1854 there were sixteen rail-making manufactories, and they made that year about one hundred and sixty thousand tons, according to the best information that I have obtained from those engaged in that trade. But my friend should remember that rail manufacturing establishments consume large quantities railroad. About one thousand miles of old road of pig iron, and the manufacturers of pig iron consume large quantities of coal. So that this measper annum will have to be relaid, and the wants ure will affect injuriously the whole iron and coal of the country will require about two thousand trade. The reciprocity treaty takes the duty off five hundred or three thousand miles of new road, of all foreign coal which can come in competition so that the demand for railroad iron will be about with our own, and yet that measure is not half so three hundred and fifty thousand tons per annum. Great as is the productive power of England, is injurious to the owners of coal mines and those engaged in the coal trade, as this. Iron manufac-it wise for us to depend upon that market when we have the raw material in such abundance? I turing establishments are the great consumers of coal in Pennsylvania.

Mr. CLAY. I wish to ask the Senator whence he derives the information which he has just stated to the Senate?

Mr. BRODHEAD. I obtained it from a newspaper publication, which has never been contradicted, so far as I know.

Mr. CLAY. It is an anonymous one. I have seen it myself.

[ocr errors]

Mr. BRODHEAD.. I could read over the names of the mills which it states, and show, if it were necessary, that they are in blast, or have been in blast, that they were built for the purpose, that they are struggling along, and that, when you strike down these establishments, you have to denend entirely on the English market, which, when pressed upon, becomes very high. It appears, from official tables, as I shall presently show, that we paid more for railroad iron when it was admitted duty free than we do now. This is the effect of depending on England for our supply. In 1845 the manufacture of railroad iron was commenced in this country. It is a new branch of industry in the United States, requiring great capital, much skilled labor, and great energy. Why should it be stricken down by railroad jobbers? I say this is pressed by railroad jobbers. They are the leaders in the movement. However much railroads may be desired by honest people, they are frequently pushed forward by jobbers. You cannot properly construct more than two thousand five hundred miles a year. When you go beyond that, you press upon the English market, and of course the price of iron becomes high.

Mr. WELLER. I asked what was the number of persons employed in this country in the manufacture of railroad iron?

Mr. BRODHEAD. I do not know how many persons the mills employ, but the number must be very large; and besides the number of those directly employed, you should take into consideration the persons who raise breadstuffs for them, and those who produce the coal, iron ore, lime stone, and pig-iron necessarily consumed in the production of iron for rails. I have before remarked that the price of railroad iron has been highest when it has come in duty free. Here is an official table showing the price of railway iron from 1832 to 1840 when no duty was imposed on it:

But the question to those who wish now to discriminate against manufacturers of railroad and other iron.

This bill, in my judgment, is violative of the plighted faith of the Government. By the pledges given when the tariff act of 1846 was adopted, the manufacturers of railroad iron were encouraged to go into the business; they are now engaged in it after the expenditure of a very large sum of money; and this bill will be destructive to them. I have some evidence as to the principle on which the act of 1846 was founded. Mr. Robert J. Walker, in his annual report as Secretary of the Treasury, in December, 1845, said:

"Whilst a due regard to the just and equal rights of all classes forbids a discrimination in favor of the manufacturer, by duties above the lowest revenue limit, no disposition is felt to discriminate against them, by reducing such duties as operate in their favor below that standard."

Is not this a proposition to discriminate against the manufacturer in favor of the consumer? Is it not, therefore, a violation of the principle on which the act of 1846 was based? Again, when the bill of 1846 was presented to the country as a revenue the following language: measure, Secretary Walker, in his report, held

"Stability in the tariff and currency is what the manufac turer should most desire. Let the tariff be permanently adjusted by a return to reasonable and moderate revenue duties, which, when imposed truly and in good faith for that purpose, will yield sufficient advantage to afford reasonable profits; and let this permanent system (and none other can be permanent) be established, and the manufacturer, in a series of years, will derive the greatest benefits from the system. The tariff has been changed and modified thisty times since the first bill, being more than once on an average for every Congress since the Government was founded; and it is vain to expect permanency from anything but a revenue tariff. Stability is what the manufacturer should desire, and especially that the question should be taken out of the arena of politics by a just and permanent settlement."

'SENATE.

view to obtain information which would enable him to recommend a revision of the act of 1846, he held this language:

"The existing tariff having been designed, generally and substantially, for revenue, and for a fair and equal operation both as between the various sections of the country and the various branches of industry, the same objects should undoubtedly be kept in view, and the reductions, if any shall be made, should be so arranged as to afford an equal porticipation in the benefit to every interest and to every section."

And upon the information thus obtained, in his annual report he makes the following wise suggestion, upon which I hope we shall be able to come to some compromise between the producer and consumer:

"It is not proposed to change the principle of ad valorem duties, but it is for the consideration of Congress, whether a specific duty on iron, made from the average of the last three or four years' ad valorem duties, might not give greater stability to the iron business, and more satisfaction to consumers, and, at the same time, prove equally beneficial to the revenue."

I consider it unnecessary to adduce further evidence to show that this bull is a violation of the

settled revenue policy of the country as adopted in the act of 1846. The evidence which I have that point. already presented is, in my opinion, conclusive on

The honorable Senator from Tennessee, as a reason for the passage of the bill, said, that we have now a redundant Treasury. I admit we have a full Treasury; but we shall not long remain in that condition. I think the probability is, that much of it will be got rid of by legislation; and besides, there is a great falling off in the revenue. I have tables from the Treasury Department, showing a very large decrease of revenue within the last few months. It is not wonderful that it

should be so. The railroad corporations have brought a crisis on the country. They have run up a fearful amount of foreign indebtedness against Our gold and silver are sent abroad to pay this indebtedness. This withdraws from the country part of the capital necessary for its business, and acts injuriously on all branches of industry,

us.

I do not intend, as I have already suggested, to go into a discussion of the tariff policy of the country; but I will make this general remark: I hold it to be a sound rule that no other or higher duties should be laid than are both necessary and sition of such duties it is wise so to select the proper for the purposes of revenue. In the impoobjects that, while the original intent is secured, the interest of the manufacturer may be regarded as an incidental consideration. To attempt more guided by false lights, emanating from the selfishis to go out on the wide ocean of uncertainty, ness alone of those who tender them, and which never can be relied upon for purposes of wise legislation. I reject alike the free trade and the protective theory. Neither can be carried into successful effect. I do not believe human wisdom can make a tariff law which will stand against the designs of Providence, and overrule the natural laws of trade and commerce. When the act of 1846 was adopted, it was supposed to be a rash measure; but that act was aided in a manner which was not expected by those who designed it. In 1847 there was a famine in Europe, and we received $20,000 from abroad for our breadstuffs. In 1849, gold was discovered in California. Both these circumstances operated in favor of the act of 1846, and contributed to swell the revenue under it. The great reason urged now for a reduction of the tariff is, that we received too much revenue. I think that in a year or eighteen months from this time, we shall not complain of a redundant Treasary. But admit the force of this argument; admit that it is proper to reduce the duties for the purpose of lessening the revenue; I say it should be done generally and impartially. You ought not to take off the duty on railroad iron, and retain it on sugar and woolen goods. You ought not to sustain the railroad-making interest at the expense of another great branch of American industry. Are not those engaged in the manufacture of iron as good and enterprising citizens as those who wish to purchase and use rails, or those who produce sugar?

Thus, it appears that, in 1846, we were promised by the Secretary of the Treasury, who had a large share in the preparation of the tariff act of that year, that it was to be a permanent measure. The same promise was made in the House of Representatives, by the gentleman who reported that bill, [Mr. McKay] It was supposed that a permanent system would suit the manufacturers better than Mr. President, I do not fear the passage of this the fluctuating policy which had before prevailed. || bill, but I do fear the result of an effort which I The same idea is to be found in the reports of Mr. expect will be made to amend the civil and diploGuthrie, the present Secretary of the Treasury.matic, or some other appropriation bill, by insertIn his circular issued nearly a year ago, with a ing a proposition to take off the duty on railroad

33D CONG....2d Sess.

iron, or refund $10,000,000 or $12,000,000, paid heretofore by railroad companies. I am aware of the fact that gentlemen plead instructions to justify themselves in voting for such a proposition. The honorable Senator from Virginia, [Mr. HUNTER,] when it was offered two years ago, as an amendment to the civil and diplomatic appropriation bill, alleged that he was instructed by his Legislature to support it. My friends from Alabama tell me that they are instructed to vote to take off the duty which is now imposed on railroad iron. Well, sir, suppose the Senators from Michigan, and from Pennsylvania, had yielded to such instructions in regard to the Wilmot proviso, and the Missouri compromise, where would have been the adjustment measures of 1850, and the KansasNebraska act of last year? I resisted the Wilmot proviso, notwithstanding the instructions of the Legislature of my State. I do not think gentle men here should now yield to instructions for a measure like this, which are got up by the agency of those who have a deep interest in the question. For my own part I recognise instructions coming from my own party-not always those from the opposition.

hope, sir, this measure will not be pressed upon us. Its friends have no assurance that, even if it be successful here, it will be taken up in the House of Representatives. They have declined to consider a bill proposing a general revision of the tariff policy of the country; and surely such a measure as this should be considered only as part of a general proposition to reduce duties. This is partial, class legislation, for the benefit of a particular set of individuals. In this respect, it comes before us in a most objectionable form. If this bill be passed, it should be accompanied by a proposition to refund these duties to those companies who have heretofore paid them, and to give to those who have used American iron a sum equal to that which they would have paid as duties, if they had used the foreign article. In every point of view in which I look at this bill, it strikes me as exceptionable.

Mr. President, old Pennsylvania has been a faithful member of this Confederacy, and why, therefore, should the representatives of other States attempt to legislate against two of her great interests? Why not place those interests upon the same footing with the interests of other States? Why impose a duty on cotton goods and not on iron, &c.? Where do southern men look for and get votes to maintain their constitutional rights against abolition fanaticism? And I beg to remind gentlemen and Senators from the eastern manufacturing States, that the fate of Pennsylvania's interests to-day may be theirs to-morrow. And I call the attention of western Senators to the fact that large grants of land have been made to them for the purpose of aiding in making railroads, &c.

Before the debate closes on this bill, Mr. President for it opens the entire question of our revenue policy-I may have something more to say when I shall have had time to arrange my thoughts and review the speech of my friend from Tennessee. I will certainly have several amendments to propose, for I feel bound by a stern sense of duty to persist in my opposition to the last.

PACIFIC RAILROAD

SPEECH OF HON. H. S. GEYER, OF MISSOUri,

IN SENATE, February 19, 1855. The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration the bill for the construction of a Railroad from the Valley of the Mississippi to the Pacific Ocean, as amended by the adoption of the substitute of Mr. GWIN

Mr. GEYER said: Mr. President, when this bill was before the Senate a few days ago, I expressed a hope that I should be able to vote for it, although I preferred the original bill reported by the com. mittee at the last session. I have, since, had an opportunity (which I had not before) to examine into the provisions of this bill, as amended, and the result is, that I cannot reconcile it to my sense of duty to vote for it. I should be content to give my vote in silence, but that I am a member

Pacific Railroad-Mr. Geyer.

of the select committee by which both the original and the substitute were reported; and the subject is one in which my constituents take a deep interest; and, therefore, I feel called upon to submit the reasons which govern my vote.

We are all anxious to form, as early as possible, an easy and rapid communication between the Atlantic States and our Pacific possessions, so as to bring them readily within supporting distance, in case of any difficulties with a foreign Power, and for the purpose also, of carrying on the commerce of our own country, on our own soil, and by our own people. But, sir, we must look at this proposition as practical men, look at it with reference to the means and the hope of accomplishment, and with reference to its effect, also on other portions of the country.

In order to make the few remarks which I shall submit, in explanation of my objections to this bill, perfectly understood, I ask the attention of the Senate, for a moment, to some statistical facts which I deem worthy of consideration. Sir, there are now in operation in the world more than forty thousand miles of railway, requiring a large supply of iron annually for the purpose of repair, and involving a large expenditure of money. Of the railroads in operation, there are in the United States twenty-one thousand three hundred and ten miles, constructed at a cost of $621,316,000. We have now in course of construction sixteen thousand nine hundred and seventy-five miles. If the construction of these roads shall cost the same amount and no more per mile, on the average, than was paid for the construction of those now in use, there will be added, in the course of a few years, to the expenditure on railroads nearly $500,000,000. Of the cost of the roads already constructed, there are, perhaps, $300,000,000 of debt outstanding; and now it is proposed, under these circumstances, to undertake three railroads between the Mississippi and the Pacific ocean, adding six thousand miles more, at a cost of from $300,000,000 to $400,000,000 for the roads alone, exclusive of depots, stations, rolling stock, and equipments.

These facts, about which there can be no dispute, should, I think, induce us to pause before we commit ourselves to the measure before the Senate. We consume now, annually, in the United States about three hundred and fifty thousand tons of railroad iron for purposes of repair, for additional tracks on roads in use, and for the construction of new roads. We have been enabled to obtain from Europe two hundred and eighty thousand tons, and about one hundred thousand tons are manufactured in the United States, making three hundred and eighty thousand per year. There will be, without the roads contemplated by this bill, a large addition annually to the consumption of iron by the con struction of new roads and repairs of the old ones, which will bring it up, perhaps, to four hundred and fifty thousand tons. Now, I would inquire where is that to come from? How is the demand to be supplied, if we increase it as proposed? The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. BRODHEAD] reminds me that a great deal of the old iron is rewrought. That may be so; but certainly, if we add to the present consumption of this country the amount required for the roads now contemplated by this bill, the demand for iron will be greatly beyond the supply, producing an injurious effect upon all the local enterprises in the United States. According to the laws of trade, the price of iron will advance when the demand shall be made to exceed the supply. The tendency, therefore, of this bill is to effect injuriously the operations on the roads on this side of the western boundary of the organized States. It will have that effect, if the roads contemplated by this bill are undertaken.

Mr. President, there has been some difference of opinion among Senators whether this bill contemplates three railroads or one. It is supposed by some that it will be submitted to the discretion of the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Postmaster General, to contract for one or more. Others think that they will be obliged to contract for the three roads, if bids are offered within the terms proposed. The bill is not very clear on that subject, but my impression is that they are to go on and receive proposals until the three roads are contracted for. The first sec

SENATE.

tion provides for them; the second directs advertisements to be published inviting proposals for the construction of each or either of them; and, by the third section, when proposals are received,. the Secretaries of War and the Interior, and the Postmaster General, are, under the direction of the President, "authorized and directed to contract with the party or parties whose proposals, as aforesaid, for said lines respectively, for the full and complete construction and keeping up of either line or each of said lines of road and telegraph."

This clause, standing alone, would seem to vest in the Secretaries and Postmaster General the authority to select one road, and reject the proposals for the others, if made; but the eleventh section provides, that in the event that any one of these roads shall not be proposed for, new advertisements shall be issued, and continue to be issued annually, until contracts for all the roads are made. The bill, therefore, contemplates the construction of three roads, if proposals for them can be obtained upon the terms prescribed.

But, while it in terms authorizes the Secretary and Postmaster General to reject such proposals for any one of the roads, it makes no provision for receiving future proposals or contracting for the construction of such road. The eleventh section applies only to the case where proposals are not received, under the first advertisement, within the time prescribed, and not to cases of such proposals received and rejected. Suppose proposals should be received for the northern and southern routes, or the whole three, and the Secretaries and Postmaster General accept the proposals, and contract for the southern road, and reject the others, as they may, by the terms of the third section, they would not be required or authorized to receive new proposals, and contract for any road for which proposals, within the terms of the act, had been received and rejected. The bill, therefore, rests in the three heads of Departments named a very large and dangerous power, which I am undisposed to confer. The bill is, however, evidently framed with a view to the construction of three roads; and its friends maintain that there is no discretion vested in the Departments, and they say that the three roads must be contracted for, if proposals within the terms prescribed are at any time made, and in that view, if that is the interpretation of the bill, it is, in my judgment, extravagant and unpracticable.

After the proposals are received and contracts entered into, there are certain preliminaries to the commencement of the work, which I propose to examine. In the first place the contractors are to fix the termini of all the roads except the central, which is to have its western terminus at the bay of San Francisco. It will be seen, in the sequel, that this is a very large discretion; and it is one which, if the proposed contracts are made and executed, will operate very beneficially to your State, Mr. President, [Mr. WELLER in the chair,} and very injuriously to that which I have the honor, in part, to represent.

The termini are to be fixed and the general route of the roads located within two years from the date of the contracts respectively; and thereupon surveys of the lands for forty miles on each side of the roads are to be be made under the direction of the President. Now, I would ask how the contractors will obtain the information necessary to a judicious location of the roads in two years, which Congress, with all the resources of the Government at command, have not been able to obtain? This is now the fourth session that I have had the honor of a seat in this Chamber, and the subject has been before the Senate at every session, I believe. Two years ago, Congress made provision for surveys or explorations of several routes. We have not yet received all the reports, and it is only within a few days that we have had access to any; and now we propose to call upon the contractors to exercise, the power and perform the duty which belongs to us. We assume that they will have information that we cannot obtain. We commit to them a discretionary power over a subject of great public interest, acknowledging ourselves incompetent or unwilling to perform the duty devolving upon us; a power which will doubtless be exercised by the contractors with reference to their own interest, and little or no regard to the interest of the public.

33D CONG....2D SESS.

Well, sir, let us advance one step further, and see whether the scheme proposed would carry us. When the contractors have designated their routes, there is to be surveyed for each road a tract of eighty miles in width, for the whole extent through the territories of the United States to the waters of the Pacific. Estimating the average length of the lines at twelve hundred miles, the quantity of land to be surveyed will be two hundred and eighty-eight thousand sections, involving an expense of between one and two millions of dollars, if the surveys can be obtained at the rates now paid.

But no one supposes, I apprehend, that the surveys can be made in the Rocky mountains or even on the plains, at the rate now paid for surveying public lands. One of your engineers describes the country from the meridian of 970 to the base of the Rocky mountains, over six hundred miles, for the whole distance north of the parallel of 340 north latitude.

Mr. GWIN. If that is true they will not select that route.

Mr. GEYER. The honorable Senator from California says "they will not select that route." Well, sir, then there will be no road north of 34tho of parallel. The description given by the engineer embraces the whole country from that parallel to our northern boundary, and if his description is accurate, it will be next to impossible to construct or maintain a railroad anywhere between the 34th and 49th of parallels. I refer to the report of Captain Pope, page 9:

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

"From the northern frontier of the United States, at the parallel of 40°, this immense region of desert country extends, without interruption, as far south as the parallel of 34°; at this parallel its continuity is suddenly and remarkably interrupted."

He seems to entertain the opinion that the only practicable route is that explored by himself between the parallels of 320 and 340. The engineers who explored the routes farther north report them to be practicable, and their description of the country examined by them is far more favorable. But when interrupted, I was inquiring into the probable expense of the survey of two hundred and eighty-eight thousand square miles of country, most of which is uninhabited, and a large portion mountainous and scarcely practicable, and another large portion of plains, which, though not inhospitable deserts, are infested by roving bands of predatory or hostile Indians. Every one must see that the surveys cannot be made at the ordinary rates, and the country will be involved in an enormous expense for surveys, preparatory to the construction of the roads.

Another objection which I take to this bill is, -even if it provided for only one road-it by its terms interposes obstacles to its construction. I took occasion the other day to say that it is indispensable to the construction of a road at all, that you should have established military posts and advanced the settlements. In my judgment that is not only not provided for in this bill, but it interposes obstacles which will prevent the settlement until after the road is commenced or perhaps nearly finished. No settlement is to be allowed, nay, it is positively prohibited by the terms of the bill, until after the surveys are made. No grant is to be made to the contractors until they shall have constructed one hundred miles of road, and then only three fourths of the quantity of land due to that portion of the road is to be conveyed to them by patent.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Pacific Railroad-Mr. Geyer.

stands anything of the nature of the country, the privations and the dangers to which the settler is exposed, will settle in the wilderness, occupy your lands, and reduce them to cultivation upon the terms prescribed by this bill?

Sir, the man who goes upon these lines of road and cultivates the land is a public benefactor, and he ought not to be taxed at the rate of $2 50 an acre for the land he reclaims. It is very proper, doubtless, in countries which are settled, such as Illinois and Missouri, in which railroad grants have been made, to hold the lands reserved at double the minimum price; but in those cases, the settlement and cultivation of the land is not necessary to the construction of the road, but the enhanced value is given to the land by the road, before the purchase. Not so along the lines of road provided for by this bill, the settlement and cultivation of the lands, to a considerable extent, is indispensable to the success of the enterprise, to furnish supplies and shelter to those engaged in the construction of the work, and protect the road when built. This bill does not afford the necessary encouragement to settlers, and practically, its provisions tend to defeat the construction of any road.

Mr. President, I have before adverted to the probable cost of the roads proposed, and the large increase of our liabilities, but I wish again to call the attention of Senators to that subject. Debtors as we are to the amount of $300,000,000 on || account of roads in use, having under contract, and in process of construction, nearly seventeen thousand miles of road, to cost in round numbers $500,000,000, I submit it as a financial question, whether it is wise or prudent to invite, encourage, and promote so large an increase of the demands upon our resources? It is true the money is not to be paid out of the Treasury, but it adds to the burdens of the country, and a pressure upon the people is as carefully to be avoided as the embarrassment of the Treasury. Already the demand created by the roads in process of construction is ascertained to be beyond the available resources of the country, and many of the works are stopped altogether, or prosecuted feebly and despondingly. The pressure in the money market has reduced railroad securities to almost a merely nominal value. Is it wise to create by a single act a demand for three or four hundred millions more? Ought we can we afford to expend eight or nine hundred millions upon railroads, within the next ten years?

As an inducement to persons to undertake the construction of the proposed roads, the bill provides for a contract by which the Government is to pay for the transportation of the mails daily, not exceeding $300 per mile, and for the transportation of troops and property at the rates now paid on other roads. That is, the bill contemplates three daily mails between the Mississippi and the Pacific, and the transportation of troops and property upon all the roads. The contracts are to be carried into effect, and payments made for transportation of the mails, troops, and property upon the road while in the course of construction, for the portion, from time to time in operation.

Now, let us see how this will work. A road may be commenced at either or both ends, or any where along the line, and whenever any "portion is in use" the mails are to be transported upon it or whether transported or not, payment is to be made at the contract price, $300 per mile. The mails and property are to be carried by railway from the beginning to the end of "the portion in use," and then other means of transportation must be provided for the residue of the way across the prairies and the mountains. The place of transfer will be advanced as additional portions of the road are put in operation, but there must be at least one on each road until it is completed.

You will observe, then, Mr. President, that this You may refuse to deliver the mails and propbill provides that before there shall be any settle- erty for transportation, but you cannot withhold ment or sale of the lands granted to the company payment. You must adopt other means of transthe road shall be made. Now, how is it with re- portation, the whole distance, or you must furnish spect to the reserved sections? Is it true you them at the end of the road in use, in whatever grant preemptions by this bill, but you do not part of the prairies or the mountains that may be. allow a man to go upon the land until after the In either case you must perform your contract, survey is made, and you grant preemptions at and pay the price agreed on. I do not misinterpret $2.50 per acre. That is the price demanded for the bill. The second section contains the terms land on the prairies where there is no timber, and of the contracts to be made; the third clause proon the Rocky mountains, where there is only a vides for the contract for carrying the mails and small portion fit for cultivation. Who that under-property of the United States for the period of

||

SENATE.

fifteen years from the completion of the road, and while in the course of construction, for the portion in use." Yes, sir, they are to make a contract to carry the mails, military and naval stores, and other property, while the road is under construction, upon so much as is finished, and they are to leave them at the end of the road, to get forward in the best way they can.

Mr. President, I have thus taken a general view of the provisions of this bill, so far as it affects the country at large. I now propose to consider it with reference to its effect on particular States. The bill proposes to give to the contractors-not to the State-twelve sections of land per mile of road in the State of California; but contains no such provision for the road within any State west or east of the Mississippi. Ilinois applied for a grant of land for railroad purposes, and it was hard work to obtain alternate sections for six miles in width. So with Missouri and Arkansas. lowa has not been able to obtain even such a grant to this day. If, as I suppose it may be intended, one of these roads shall go through Iowa, I think it would have been but fair to provide twelve sections per mile for the road through that State. We have a grant in Missouri of six sections per mile, to be selected within fifteen miles of the road, and not fifty, as in California.

I do not complain of the proposed grant in California, because that State is eventually to become the owner of the road within her limits, but of the discrimination made in her favor against the other land States. Illinois, Missouri, and Arkansas, in consideration of six sections of land per mile, are required to transport the mails at such price as Congress shall prescribe, and the troops and property of the United States free of charge. In California we propose to appropriate twelve sections of land per mile to pay for carrying the mails, $300 per mile, and for troops and property a full compensation. To this inequality I object, and, I may ask, why were the States west of the Mississippi, through which one of the roads may pass, altogether overlooked by the framers of this bill? Why not make the eastern terminus of the central route (so called) on the west bank of the Mississippi, appropriate the same quantity of land per mile within the State through which it may pass, and afford the same inducements for the construction of the road as in California? Certainly there were no constitutional scruples to be overcome. If the provisions of this bill are wise and constitutional in respect to California, they would be no less so if extended to Iowa or Missouri. The objection to the discrimination in favor of California does not, of course, address itself to Senators from the Atlantic States, and perhaps may not be appreciated by any but the Representatives from Missouri, and other States immediately interested. To my mind, it is decisive against the bill.

[ocr errors]

Another, and to me an insuperable objection to the bill is, that it presents inducements to form combinations against the interest of the State which I in part represent, so that there is scarcely a remote possibility that the eastern terminus of either road shall be on her border. Ostensibly the bill fixes only the western terminus of the central road, and that at the Bay of San Francisco. But, in reality, it also determines the eastern terminus of the southern road. The western " border of Texas on the Rio Grande, above the north boundary of Mexico, being only about thirteen miles long. The contractors are to select the routes and fix the western terminus of the southern road, and the eastern terminus of the central. The southern road is to "commence on the western border of Texas, and pursue the most eligible route to the navigable waters of the Pacific, in the State of California." The contractors for this road will have a large discretion which will be used to their best advantage. Now, when the most valuable, if not the only valuable lands to be appropriated to that road are in California, there can be no doubt that the city of San Francisco will be the western terminus of the southern road. The contractors will have the power to fix that point, and will have no inducement to select any other. I hazard nothing in predicting that the undertakers of the road will find "the waters of the Pacific" mentioned in the bill, at or very near the city of San Francisco.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »