33D CONG....2D SESS.

if a vessel was out fourteen or seventeen days. I have not gone into a calculation; but I think very likely that if the Post Office Department in that, as in all other contracts-taking in view all the casualties and difficulties-had advertised for the performance of the service in the time that the Collins line perform it, it could have been obtained at a less sum than is paid to them, and at a sum which would pay a reasonable profit to the con

tractors.

Therefore, I say, Mr. President, that I have heard no good reason given why we should part with the power which we now have of terminating the contract. What is it? Why, that Congress may hereafter refuse this condition of the contract; and, now, when one third of this body are about to return to their constituents, and when this House of Representatives is to be succeeded by another House, why do they, at this late hour of the session, desire to take from their successors that just control, which has been secured by their predecessors, over this contract, to which the country is entitled? I know of no good reason, and cannot vote for it.

Mr. STUART. There are two or three points in which I desire to correct the honorable Senator from Georgia. I do not wish to follow him in the line of his argument; but, sir, in the first place, he is mistaken in supposing that he is correct when he says that this line has come here again. Sir, the Postmaster General, in his annual report, recommended Congress to give the notice. It was a recommendation which he gave no reason for making, except that he thought the price paid to the line was too large. Congress some two years ago passed upon that question and decided upon

it.

The Postmaster General having made that recommendation, the company were bound to come here, and resist the plain violation of an agreement into which they had entered with the Government.

Again, sir, the Senator says that he is obliged to take the statements of this Postmaster General as true, because he says if they are not true, he has got the money, and does not show what he has done with it. Now, sir, that is another mistake. The difficulty is that the Postmaster General does not credit his income to the persons who earn it.

Mr. TOOMBS. Then he does not understand his business.

Mail Steamer Appropriation Bill-Debate.

brought here by the improper action of the officers of this Government. Here is one thing which has been done of late which was never done before. The appropriations are put into a separate bill. You appropriate for the rest of the Post Office affairs of the country in the General Post Office appropriation bill; but for this, and similar lines, in order that they may be constantly under the threatening attitude of some of the officers of this Government, or some one of the committees of Congress, you make a separate bill, and you give notice that you are going to fight them, you have been fighting them, because you can lose that bill and not stop the wheels of the Government. The whole plan has been carried out most ingeniously by the Government, either through committees of Congress, or through officers of the Government. Put these appropriations into the general appropriation bill, where they belong, and you will not find this company threatened every year with annihilation.

Thus much I have thought it due, eminently due, in justification of these men, to say; and that is all I care about it. If Congress sees fit to terminate the contract, to carry out the ideas of the Senator from Georgia, to take the ships, to blot out the line, I, sir, will submit without a single regret. I can bear that loss as well as the Senator himself or anybody else can bear it. I shall vote against it, believing it to be against the fundamental interests of this Government. Sir, the history of this transaction will show that these individuals have been compelled to come here, and resist this oppression, this violation of what was a plain understanding; that is to say, so long as you perform the twenty-six trips in a manner satisfactory to the Government and the community, the question of your compensation is settled. The Postmaster General says, in substance," they have performed their duty; they are the only company that have done it; and yet I recommend Congress to give notice to terminate the extra compensation, because I think it is too much." I say Congress settled that question when they granted the compensation.

Mr. HUNTER. I am not disposed to speak on this subject, for I am very anxious to have the question taken; but it is an entire mistake to say that Congress intended, when it gave the additional compensation, that the company should have it so long as they performed their duties. Mr. STUART. I say he does not credit what Not at all. It was said that they were not making he receives from Boston, Philadelphia, and Cali-enough to enable them to compete with the Cunard fornia to the company that earns it. It goes into the Treasury; it passes to the credit of "amount received from Philadelphia," "amount received from Boston," &c.; but by not giving the credit to the Collins line, for the amount received from it, he does not show where it came from. Sir, there is no money stolen from the Treasury as the Senator fain would have us believe.

Mr. TOOMBS. Not at all."

MË STUART. The whole difficulty is that he does not credit the sources that earned it. The Senator says, again, that this bill is taking from the power of Congress the right to terminate this contract. Not at all, sir. Congress possesses the power under the contract to terminate it at any moment, and take the ships and pay for them, and no less will they have that power by refusing to adopt the amendment. It simply affects the extra compensation, and nothing else.

The Senator says, again, that he would have the persons pay for the mail service who receive its benefits. That is one of the theories which are very beautiful in the abstract, but utterly impracticable to be carried out. It is one of the theories that would cut off several States of this Union from the benefits of the mail service, because in looking over the returns you will find several States that do not pay as much in the way of postages as is paid for their service. But, sir, they are just as much entitled to the mail service as the rest. I say it is a theory which would be very fine if you could carry it out, but it is utterly impracticable.

The Senator was set right by me-and it was the only interruption that I felt myself at liberty to make, for I dislike to make any-with respect to what I said before. I deny, sir, having said that these persons come here voluntarily and interfere with the legislation of Congress; but they are

line; it was proposed to give the additional allow-|| ance to enable them to do so, and it was expressly provided that the additional allowance should last two years, and after that that Congress might put an end to it. What was to be the reason for putting an end to it? The moment they found they could carry on the business without the additional allowance, there being no further necessity for it, they might put an end to it.

two years. But on the other hand, the great rivals of the company are withdrawn; the British have required the Cunard steamers in the east, and while the Collins line have not a heavy competition, it is proposed to keep up the entire allowance. Surely it would be no violation of the contract to terminate it. But that is not even proposed. All that is asked is, that we retain in our hands the power to give the notice. Suppose the Cunarders should be withdrawn entirely; suppose the Collins line should not have the competition; the only excuse upon which the extra was ever given, was to enable them to compete with that company; and yet you propose to take away from Congress the power to give notice, and put an end to the allowance, at the very time that the compensation is being diminished, when everything shows that it cannot long be formidable.

Mr. SEWARD. The Senate has been several times to-day reminded that at the last session of Congress I committed what seemed to be if not an abuse, at least an impropriety, not in saying too much, but talking too long, in favor of the Collins line of steamers. I plead, in extenuation of that course, that the Senate, in the night before the adjournment, after a long debate, had sustained the views which I then entertained, and which I now entertain; and that the next day, just before the final close of the session, when Senators were impatient to leave, and were leaving rapidly, it became doubtful whether the Senate, as it remained constituted, would not renounce those views. Therefore I deemed it necessary to guard against what would have been a surprise upon the majority of the Senate, who had voted in accordance with those views on the night before. I hope it is now a sufficient vindication of that action on my part, that the Senate itself, when it came together this session, confirmed those same views, and that the House of Representatives also, when it assembled this session, reconsidered its own position, and adopted that to which I had labored so earn. estly to bring the Senate. Having excused that impropriety, I will not now commit another abuse by speaking long upon this subject. I have sent for an honorable and distinguished Senator, of advanced age, who, I hope, will be here in a few moments, [Mr. CASS.] I rise merely to fill up a gap of time; and I know that such is the respect for that Senator entertained here that I shall be excused for this intrusion.

The Senator from Georgia [Mr. ToоMBS] has certainly convinced me, and no doubt every one else, that he is most sincere and in earnest in opposing this measure; but I think if he would review his own positions, he would not be satisfied with them, after he should have discovered how broad and how foreign is the ground that he has occupied.

Mr. HUNTER. Congress did not offer to give the notice until at that time when the notice might have been given, in my opinion, according to the law, because, sir, the six months notice which was required, if given at the time it was proposed to have been given, would have been after the two years had elapsed, so that they did not violate the contract in that regard. At any rate it was not given; this bill of the last session was defeated, and defeated by a friend of the line, who spoke against time, as is well known.

Mr. RUSK. That was before the two years expired.

Mr. HUNTER. No, sir; that was before the two years expired, but the notice might have been given within the two years, provided the compensation did not terminate until after the two years, and no one contemplated terminating the extra compensation, until after two years. Be that as it may, the notice was not given, and the two years have now elapsed. I say it would be no violation of the contract even although the Collins line kept the time prescribed, if we were now to refuse to give the extra allowance. They are on a much better footing than they were. They have enjoyed its privilege for a long time-for more than

sum of $858,000. No one here disputes that debt; no one here proposes that we shall withhold the money for any cause whatever; no one proposes that we shall pay a cent less than the $858,000. So far we are all agreed. It is money that is due by contract, and the contract itself can not now be wisely, justly, or properly reviewed. So the money is due. What remains? Why, in making the appropriation to pay that sum, the House of Representatives-which originates bills of this kind, which originated the bills at the last session, at this session, and must originate them at every session-has come to the conviction that it would be wise and just to repeal a clause in the law under which that contract was made, which authorized Congress to give notice, at its discretion, after the period of two years, of a purpose to discontinue the contract. That is all. The House propose that we shall repeal that clause; the question is, whether we shall or not. That is the whole question. Of all which has been said beyond that, I have only to say, that it is foreign from the question.

What reasons are given why we should repeal this clause? One alone of those reasons is sufficient to satisfy my mind, namely: that on an appropriation bill in the last week of the session,

33D CONG....2D SESS.

in the last hours of the fifth day from the close of the session, it is never wise unnecessarily to raise a conflict with the House of Representatives, because, in the first place, you jeopard the passage of a great bill; and in the next place, you jeopard the passage of a great many other great and necessary bills. Accordingly, we are habitually accustomed to waive additions, stipulations, and provisions which we should otherwise prefer, in order to secure agreement with the House of Representatives, and to bring the business of the Government to a successful and happy termination. All the hazards which can attend any bill will attend this, if returned to the House of Representatives; for whatever difference of opinion there is here, the same difference of opinion, we know, would exist there, and would engage that House in long, strenuous, and earnest debate; whatever of feeling or of prejudice; whatever of passion or of interest, attaches to this question here, would attend the bill if we send it back there, and it would be jeoparded, and might be lost. What are the consequences of that? The second time the faith of the Government is broken, and $858,000 due to citizens for services actually rendered under a contract, is withheld-is not paid. That is bad enough; but besides that, come all the entangling consequences to other business.

To these considerations, what is the reply? It is that we have this power, and we please to keep it. It gratifies us to say that we will not relinquish the power of giving this notice. Why shall we not? If we are wise men, we will retain it, only because it is valuable for something; and if we are wise men, we shall give it up if it is not valuable. Now, what is it worth? Do we wish to give the notice now? There is only one honorable Senator who proposes to give that notice by virtue of the reservation contained in the contract. The whole Senate, comparatively, like the whole House, are ready to pay the money already accrued, without giving the notice. The contract has been in force for two years, and the legislation during that time has shown that it was not necessary or proper to give the notice heretofore. Then no cause bas existed heretofore, and none at present exists, for giving this notice. Do you anticipate a state of things, when you will be required to give it? Are circumstances changed-changed favorably for the contractors and unfavorably for the Government? No, sir; the mails are carried with the stipulated expedition; the pride and honor of the country are sustained; its service is completely performed, just as it was required to be; the Government has no cause of complaint, and anticipates none.

On the other hand the parties to whom it is contemplated that the notice may, in some circumstances, be given, have been unfortunate-unfortunate by a calamity that has touched the chords of the public heart most deeply, and which has so powerfully affected the mind of every individual in the country that it is painful to speak of it, even in the most public manner on so great an occasion as this. One of those ships, freighted with the lives of our fellow-citizens, has gone down into the depths of the sea. You have a bond that it shall be replaced; you wish the place of the ship supplied as it ought to be, and you expect that it will be supplied under the contract. The contractor says, If I must supply the place of this ship, for the short period which remains of the contract, will you not release me from the condition which authorizes you arbitrarily to give notice that you will discontinue the contract? It seems to me a fair appeal. Upon what grounds is it presented and sustained? Sir, it is sustained, and well sustained, upon this ground; that notwithstanding all the figures that have been arrayed here, this has been to the contractors an unprofitable contract, it is still an unprofitable contract. Their money has not been wasted, but it has been spent with energy and fidelity, with zeal and self-sacrificing liberality in carrying out their contract with the Government. Although this is true, it is nevertheless the fact that their stock is

not now worth, never has been worth the par price, and, if their contract continues there is no probability it will ever be worth more than sixty or seventy cents on the dollar.

The company who are to build another of these great steamships must do it with capital and with credit, either their own, or derived from some

Mail Steamer Appropriation Bill-Debate.

other source. Capitalists will not furnish the money to execute a contract which is in perpetual jeopardy of being canceled by legislative authority. This, sír, is a just consideration. It is one which ought to prevail, and must prevail, against a mere speculative advantage of having power to annul a contract-a power which you expect never to have occasion to exercise.

Other considerations, I know, have been adduced here in regard to the unpleasant circumstances which attend the advocacy of this bill and its discussion here. It is said that it brings what is called a suspicion and a taint upon the purity of Congress. Sir, it is our misfortune that we make an unnecessary stipulation, and reserve in our hands a power, in consequence of which every opponent of this scheme about the purlieus of the Capitol, in the city of New York, through the whole Union, all competitors, all enemies, all haters of Collins and his prosperity, will come here and combine together to urge Congress to discontinue the contract that their own private ends may be attained. Such as this is the spectacle which we see before us. Here are your Vanderbilts and others, rivals or enemies of the Collins line, who are pressing upon Congress to exercise this power of annulling the contract, in order that they may have the benefit of it; and when the proprietors of the line come forward in great alarm and peril to defend their rights, they are told that their solicitations impair the dignity and taint the atmosphere of Congress!

Let us put an end, then, to these things, by giving up a control which is useless to us, which is injurious to the enterprise itself; and my word for it, you will never more hear one whisper of complaint throughout the land about the Collins line.

Sir, I remember the history of this case when it|| was here before. I remember that the same threats and intimidations were offered, the same apprehensions and alarms were excited, and the same suspicions were shown everywhere in the public mind; and members of Congress were afraid to vote the allowance which they believed to be just, because they thought the public would not comprehend the importance of the line; but the law passed, and for a time there was peace. Until the close of the last session of Congress, there was one universal acclaim of joy, satisfaction, and gratitude throughout the country, for the public spirit with which Congress had sustained this great national enterprise. Prejudice is raised against this line on the ground of Mr. Vanderbilt's offer. Sir, Congress required ships of a certain size and magnitude, combining elegance, solidity, durability, and swiftness, and Collins furnished them. They obtained by this contract just what was required. The contractors have given just what was proposed, and even more. Now Vanderbilt comes and says, 46

dispense with some of these requirements, and I will carry your mails by furnishing you with ships of my own on cheaper terms." Could you accept that proposition of Vanderbilt justly, without, at the same time, taking the Collins steamers and paying for them? and if you do that, I wish to know what you will make by discontinuing your contract with Collins, and entering into a new contract with Vanderbilt.

Again, it is said by some Senators, that this is an extravagant, a luxurious line. Sir, this line of steamers is, in my judgment, the proper diplomatic representative of the United States to the Old World. Who is there here that hesitated last Saturday to give a salary of $17,000 a year to the Minister at the Court of St. James-a salary with which he might maintain himself in a style worthy of the representative of this great Republic? Who is there that refused to give a salary of $15,000 to the American Minister sent to France, and of $12,000 to the Minister to Spain? Who is there that denies the justice of the appeal, that he who represents his country abroad, in its diplomacy, shall maintain the dignity of his country there? But, sir, this line of ships-the strongest in the world, and the swiftest in the world this diplomatic messenger traversing the ocean both ways, exchanges the salutations and the greetings of men and of nations in both hemispheres, while it opens the way for the establishment of mutual commerce between the ports of our own land and all the ports of the European continent. It is the pride of my heart that I can see that line sustained in its

SENATE.

strength, its power, its elegance, its majesty. Sir, would you tell me that that proud position which you occupy would be just as dignified, and that you could perform your duties just as well if I should strip away all that drapery from above your head? Would you say that the Senate of the United States would lose nothing in dignity if I should strike down at a blow that beautiful collonade, and bring down that noble dome to the level of the ceilings of barracks in a military etation? Would you say that was an economy in Government necessary to be practised by a great people?

Sir, the Collins line is the great mail carrier between Europe and America. I shall sustain it cheerfully now, and always, with every contribution which is necessary, and I shall endeavor to extend similar lines of communication across the Pacific, until we shall have encircled the world with the couriers of intelligence, and the instructions of civil and religious liberty.

I have one additional observation, and then I shall close. We are told that this is a monopoly, and that it is no way to encourage a steam marine by creating a monopoly. Sir, it is the way, and the only way, in which you can bring a steam marine into existence. It is thirty years since Dr. Lardner predicted that steam would never be a self-sustaining agent upon the ocean. When the first steamer crossed from Bristol to New York, the world derided the short-sightedness of the great philosopher. But, sir, what is the fact? Thirty years have elapsed, and, although steam is so necessary and useful an agent, it is not yet self-sustaining as a navigating power across the Atlantic, nor across any other ocean; and you have your choice either by the Government to aid and sustain steam lines, or to do without them altogether. It is true, the time will come when it will not be necessary to render this aid; but until that time shall come it is most wise, and just, and prudent to sustain it in this way. Honorable Senators tell us, if you will withdraw Government patronage you will have enough competitors. Sir, has not Government effectually withdrawn its patronage from railroads and left private individuals to build them? Yet what have you seen? There has never been built in the United States, nor in England, nor in France, nor in Germany, although the railroad discovery is forty years old, a railroad that was not built by a monopolizing railroad company, aided sometimes, and in this country often, by the money of Government. The Erie canal, the most successful work of internal improvement ever made, was not built by a private company, nor by a company with its own money. On the contrary, it may be doubted whether it would ever yet have been built had it not been adopted by New York, and constructed as a great national work.

The PRESIDING OFFICER, (Mr. FITZPATRICK in the chair.) The question is on the amendment of the Committee on Finance.

Mr. GWIN stated that Mr. WELLER had

paired off with Mr. JONES, of Tennessee.

Mr. BAYARD stated that he had paired off with Mr. SLidell.

Mr. DAWSON stated that Mr. BELL had

paired off with Mr. JOHNSON.

Mr. EVANS stated that he had paired off with Mr. CLAYTON.

Mr. DODGE, of Wisconsin, stated that he had paired off with Mr. HAMLIN.

resulted-yeas 17, nays 19; as follows: The question being taken by yeas and nays,"

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Brodhead, Butler, Chase, Dawson, Fessenden, Fitzpatrick, Geyer, Hunter, Mallory, Ma son, Morton, Pratt, Toombs, Toucey, Wade, and Wells

17.

NAYS-Messrs. Allen, Badger, Benjamin, Brainerd, Cooper, Douglas, Foot, Gillette, Gwin, James, Pettit, Rusk, Seward, Shields, Stuart, Sumner, Thomson of New Jer sey, Walker, and Wright—19.

So the amendment was not agreed to.

ported from the Committee on Finance is to amend

The PRESIDENT. The next amendment re

the clause "for transportation of the mails across the Isthmus of Panama, $85.314," by striking out "$85,314" and inserting "$120,000."

Mr. HUNTER. That is according to estimate. The amendment was rejected.

Mr. HUNTER. There are two other amend

33D CONG....2D SESS.

ments which are necessary, and which I will explain. The bill contains a clause for transportation of the mails from New York to New Orleans, Charleston, Savannah, Havana, and Chagres, and back, $261,000. The House deducted the ten per centum in appropriating the amount. They have not appropriated enough; it ought to be $290,000. I move an amendment accordingly.

The amendment was rejected.

Mr. HUNTER. I will merely state, in regard to that matter, that the amendment which I moved is necessary to make it accord with the estimate. The Senate may do as they please with it.

Mr. CHASE. I submit the following amendment to come in after the clause in regard to the Collins steamers:

And provided further, That the proprietors of said line of steamers shall consent to such modification of the existing contract as that the Postmaster General may advertise for, and accept, proposals for carrying the mails in suitable steamships of not less than two thousand tons burden, between the United States and Great Britain, from and after the 31st of December, 1857, when said contract shall cease to be obligatory; and the said Postmaster General, in case said modification shall be agreed to, shall advertise for such proposals, which shall be submitted to Congress at the next session.

Mr. DAWSON. If the Senator from Ohio will give way, I will make a motion to adjourn. Several SENATORS. Oh, no.

Mr. DAWSON. The attendance in the Senate is very thin. Thirty-six Senators only voted upon the question on which the yeas and nays have been taken, and the amendment thrown out. We ought to have a fuller Senate to decide the question. I therefore move the postponement of

its further consideration until twelve o'clock tomorrow, in order that we may have a full Senate, and that it may be decided upon a full vote. Every man knows that it is due to the country that that should be the case.

The PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Ohio yield the floor for that purpose?

Mr. CHASE. Yes, sir.

Mr. HUNTER. If we adjourn in this condition, the whole subject will be open to discussion to-morrow, and we shall spend another day upon it. We have the civil and diplomatic appropriation bill, the Navy appropriation bill, and the fortification bill all to come up within the last four days of the session I hope we shall not adjourn.

The PRESIDENT. The question is on postponing the further consideration of the bill until twelve o'clock to-morrow, and making it the special order for that hour.

Mr. DAWSON called for the yeas and nays, and they were ordered.

Mr. MASON. I wish to put a question to my colleague, the chairman of the Committee on Finance, to see if I understand correctly what he has proposed. I understood him to say that on one of these lines, but not the Collins line, from some cause there was appropriated by the House ten per cent. less than the estimate. I want to know from him whether that ten per cent. less than the . estimate is necessary to be added to bring the price up to the contract.

Mr. HUNTER. That ten per cent. is necessary to be added to bring the price up to the contract price. It is also, perhaps, fair to state, in order that my colleague may understand it fully, that the ten per cent. on the appropriation has been reserved in the Treasury, in order to be forfeited in case of a non-observance of the contract, although it has been usual, heretofore, to appropriate the entire amount. The House, by some mistake, appropriated the entire amount in regard to the Collins line, but made a deduction of ten per cent. in regard to the other lines. I propose to restore that to the estimate.

Mr. MASON. Then the case appears to be this: that the Collins line has, by the House, been allowed the great advantage of having this notice to terminate the contract withdrawn from the contract, and to be no longer a part of it, but another line has not within ten per cent. of the amount of its contract price appropriated; and the Senate refuse now to add that ten per cent. I really think that in that state of things it is best for us to adopt the suggestion of the Senator from Georgia, and to adjourn until to-morrow morning, to see whether injustice will not be done by this proceeding.

Mr. DOUGLAS. From the statement made by the Senator from Virginia, the chairman of the Committee on Finance, I understand that the ten per cent. is to be reserved for the performance of the contract, but that it has been usual heretofore to appropriate it, and allow the Executive Department to reserve it. This time Congress reserves it, so that it makes no difference to the proprietors of the line whether it is appropriated or not. It can make no difference to the Treasury nor to That being the case, why anybody concerned. insist upon it?

Mr. HUNTER. Here, though, is an appropriation which the Senate refused to put in, that does make a difference.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I am talking about this. Mr. HUNTER. The item of the appropriation for the transportation of the mails across the Isthmus of Panama, $85,314, should, according to the estimate, be $120,000. The Committee on Finance have moved to raise the appropriation to the estimate. That, too, the Senate refuses to do.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Was it a part of the contract to make the amount $120,000, or is it the estimate of the Department?

Mr. HUNTER. It was to meet the estimate of the Department.

Mr. DOUGLAS. But it is not necessary, according to the contract.

Mr. HUNTER. No, sir.

Mr. ADAMS. It is said by the Senator from Illinois that it is not necessary to add that ten per cent., so far as the line alluded to by him is concerned; but it is deemed by the Senate and House of Representatives to be necessary to add that very ten per cent. to the Colling line appropriation whenever it is concerned. Now, sir, I should like to know why the ten per cent. is added to the appropriation upon the Collins line and not upon the other lines?

Mr. BUTLER. If my friend will allow me, I will tell him. The reason is, that the Collins line, like Aaron's rod, swallows up all the others. [Laughter.]

The question being taken by yeas and nays on the motion to postpone, resulted-yeas 19, nays 21; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Brodhead, Butler, Chase, Cooper, Dawson, Evans, Fitzpatrick, Geyer, Mallory, Mason, Morton, Pratt, Shields, Sumner, Toombs, Toucey, Wells, and Wilson-19.

NAYS-Messrs. Allen, Badger, Bayard, Benjamin, Brainerd, Douglas, Fessenden, Foot, Gillette, Gwin, Hunter, James, Pearce, Pettit, Rusk, Seward, Stuart, Thomson of New Jersey, Wade, Walker, and Wright-21. So the motion was not agreed to.

Mr. CHASE. I feel it to be my duty to state briefly the considerations which will control my vote. I have no feeling whatever against this line. On the contrary, I desire its prosperity; but, sir, I think that my first duty is to the State which I represent, and to the Government which I assist, in part, to administer.

SENATE.

that, if the additional compensation was granted, in the course of time the company would be remunerated for its losses within the time which would elapse before Congress would have the power to give the notice-that is, before the 31st of December, 1854. Who moved the proviso, limiting that contract to the 31st of December, 1854? It was the honorable Senator from Texas, [Mr. RUSK,] who then, as now, was a decided advocate of this line. I say it was that honorable Senator who moved this very proviso, limiting the contract to the 31st of December, 1854.

Mr. MASON. If the honorable Senator from Ohio will permit me, I will move that the further consideration of the subject be postponed until to-morrow at twelve o'clock. I think, from some conversation with Senators who made a majority upon the late vote, that they are satisfied that it will be expedient to adjourn. With the consent of the Senator, I submit that motion, and on it I ask for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, and taken. Pending the announcement of the result, Mr. WILSON said: When I voted on the proposition of the committee, I did so through a misapprehension. I voted "no;" I intended to vote "aye."

Mr. BRODHEAD. The Senator can move to reconsider the vote.

The PRESIDENT. Yes, sir; that is the only way to proceed.

Mr. MASON. I suppose the Senator can be allowed to change his vote by unanimous consent?

The PRESIDENT. No, sir; the rule is imperative on that point. The Senator can move a reconsideration of the vote.

The result of the vote on the motion to postpone was then announced-yeas 21, nays 18; as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Allen, Benjamin, Bright, Brodhead, Chase, Cooper, Dawson, Fitzpatrick, Geyer, Hunter, Mallory, Mason, Morton, Pearce, Pratt, Shields, Sumner, Toombs, Toucey, and Wells-21.

NAYS-Messrs. Badger, Bayard, Brainerd, Douglas, Fessenden, Foot, Gillette, Gwin, James, Pettit, Rusk, Seward, Stuart, Thomson of New Jersey, Wade, Walker, Wilson, and Wright-18.

So the motion was agreed to.

Mr. STUART. I move that the Senate adjourn. The PRESIDENT. The Senator from Massachusetts can now make his motion.

Mr. STUART. He can do that to-morrow just as well as to-night.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, February 28, 1855. The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill; the pending question being on the amendment submitted by Mr CHASE, to add the following:

Provided further, That the proprietors of said line of steamers shall consent to such inodification of the existing contract as that the Postmaster General may advertise and accept proposals for carrying the mails in Suitable steamships of not less than two thousand tons burden between the United States and Great Britain, from and after the 31st of December, 1857, when said contract shall cease to be obligatory; and the said Postmaster General, in case said modification shall be agreed to, shall advertise for such proposals, which shall be submitted to Congress at the next

session.

Mr. CHASE. When I gave way for the motion to postpone last night, I was endeavoring to explain the grounds which induced me to offer this amendment. I shall now conclude, very briefly, what I have to`say.

amount.

I remember well upon what arguments the increase was urged during the session of 1852. We were told, then, that the contract had been a losing one; that the company had not been able to complete their vessels and transport the mails for the sum stipulated; and it was said at the same time

One of the arguments which was urged in favor of giving up the power of Congress to terminate this extra allowance, is that the additional compensation allowed by the act of 1852 was designed to increase permanently the total payment for the mail service of the Collins line. I showed, when I last addressed the Senate, that the honorable Senator from Texas, [Mr. Rusk,] who was a friend of this line at that time, and who is now a friend of

ability, proposed the proviso reserving to Congress the power to give this notice. I should say, perhaps, in fairness and justice to that honorable Senator, that he did not originate the proviso, bat that he proposed it as a substitute for a proposition which emanated from the honorable Senator from North Carolina.

33D CONG....2D SESS.

the difference, which made it just double. These letters are now charged twenty-four cents. If they were held at the old British postage, the figures would be just double. Three fourths of the letters which came by these mails were delivered in the city of New York, I have no doubt, and there is no expense incurred in the inland postage. Is it, therefore, right to deduct that? I apprehend that it is not right to deduct that item. It is an advantage which we get to be sure, on the inland postage, but it is an advantage to the Government that five cents are paid on letters which are to be delivered in New York without expense to the Government in transporting them inland at all. Then, as to the commissions of the postmasters; it is only necessary to state that they have been deducted from the Collins line, though they ought to come out of the revenue of the United States. There is no obligation in the contract to pay the commissions of postmasters.

The Assistant Postmaster General, when he handed me these statements, said there was nothing in them but what he knew to be correct. There might possibly be some mails that were not included. There is the nearness with which this comes to my prediction, that the line would soon repay us.

Mr. HUNTER. The Senator from Texas has shown one side of the account; but I do not think he states the other correctly. I hold in my hand an estimate of three trips, one by the Atlantic, another by the Baltic, and a third by the Pacific. That estimate is furnished by the Post Office Department, and according to it, the net revenue for one trip was $9,420, from the second, $5,120, and from the third, $6,263, making something like $21,000 net from the three trips.

Mr. RUSK. What were the dates? Mr. HUNTER. The Atlantic sent the 10th January, 1855, the Baltic received the 11th January, 1855, and the Pacific received 5th January, 1855.

Mail Steamer Appropriation Bill—Debate.

Senator from Texas now undertakes to show that this service remunerates the United States within a small sum. He gives a statement in regard to two trips; but, sir, all calculations founded on a trip here, or a trip there, must, of necessity, be illusory. I observed one point, in which, it seems to me, the honorable Senator failed in giving a full explanation, even of those trips. He did not deduct the British share of the postages, which is a very important item; but he stated it as if the whole postage receipts of the Collins line went into the Treasury of the United States.

Mr. RUSK. The honorable Senator is grossly mistaken. I deducted the British postages, and so stated it. Here is the statement of the Assistant Postmaster General, deducting the United States and British inland postages-eight twenty-fourths. The Senator says I did not deduct the British postages. The statement does deduct them. I stated as distinctly as words could state, that in the postal treaty, five cents were added to every letter for the United States inland, and three for the British inland; and in the statement there is deducted five twenty-fourths for the Americans and three twenty-fourths for the British, making eight twentyfourths altogether.

Mr. CHASE. That may be so. I have not seen the statement which the Senator quotes. But I was about to say that taking the statement just as made by the Senator from Texas, it gives only the result of two trips; while, on the authority of the Post Office Department, I give the result of the whole year. Which is the more reliable? The statement of two trips, which may have been more than usually remunerative and profitable, or the statement of the Department, extending through a whole year? I hold in my hand a statement of the Postmaster General, showing the gross receipts during the whole time of the contract thus far. It commences on the 27th of April, 1850, and runs up to June 30, 1854. Now, how much do you think were the gross receipts? Why, $1,000,000, and a little fraction over. How much were the net receipts to the General Government? Why, $900,000, and a fraction over. Call it $1,000,000, and what then has been the average gross income from this service, for which we pay the enormous sum of $858,000, near $1,000,000? Less than $250,000 a year? According to the statement of the Postmaster General less than that was received last year.

Now, observe that this is the most favorable statement which can be made for the line; and how the Senator can say that we ought not to deduct the inland postage, I cannot imagine; because the Government has to bear all the expense of conveying these letters and of conveying the closed mails to the British Province of Canada. Surely we ought to deduct what it costs from the receipts of the line. It costs us this much to carry them. It may be more hereafter. I hope it We charge five cents, I think it is, on the inland will; I believe it will; but then it cannot reach a postage; surely it costs us that amount. Nor is sum which will justify the anticipation of remunerit unfair to charge the revenue account of the Col-ative receipts, which is entertained by the Senlins line with its proportion of the expenses in collecting the post office revenue, and that is done in this statement, so that it will be found, I think, even if we take the most favorable view, that the receipts of the line are very far behind the sum necessary to compensate for what is paid by the United States.

Mr. RUSK. I do not think the honorable Senator intended to produce a wrong impression, but he has not put down the receipts of the round voyage. The Collins line receive $33,000 for the out and incoming voyage, or the round trip., The Senator's statement only includes the postages for

one way.

Mr. HUNTER. That is the gross sum. If it was $7,000 one trip, it would be only $14,000 for the gross sum, and twenty-six times $14,000 is very far short of $858,000.

Mr. RUSK. I think the honorable Senator will not insist upon that. The $33,000 are paid for the trip out and back, and the honorable Senator from Virginia, to get at a loss, only counts up what is made by the trip one way.

Mr. HUNTER. I double that for the amount of the round trip, and I repeat that twenty-six times $14,000 falls very far short of $858,000. The Senator from Texas takes the gross revenue without making the proper deduction, and selects a trip or two on which their receipts were the largest. He does not take the general average of their receipts per trip, as he ought to do, to make the calculation proper and fair.

Mr. CHASE. I yield with very great pleasure to Senators for correction and explanation. I have no wish to make a speech. All I desire to do is to explain the reasons which, in my judgment, require me, in the discharge of my public duty, to submit the proposition which I have made. The

ator from Texas. Certainly there is nothing in the present circumstances or future prospects of receipts from this line which will warrant the continuance of the extra compensation, against the understanding of 1852, which, as I have shown, contemplated the discontinuance of that compensation, at least, as soon as the Collins associates had been indemnified for their losses. It was supposed and stated that this indemnity would be realized by the 31st of December, 1854. But now what are we asked to do? To appropriate this additional sum for the current year? No; nobody objects to that. The notice has not been given, and the $850,000 must be paid for this year. What then? To surrender absolutely all right to give the notice in future; to exempt these contractors absolutely from all liability to the discontinuance of the $50,000 additional compensation, which was originally intended to be temporary; to leave them to act as they see fit in every respect, speed as well as others, within the terms of their original contract. That, sir, is the proposition.

I have never shown any disposition to deal unjustly or unfairly by this line. It will be remembered by Senators that, during the last session of Congress, when it was proposed to give the notice in advance of the 31st of December, 1854, I said -what I felt to be just-that the line had a right to the whole time up to the 31st of December to show to the country the merits of its service, so that Congress might determine upon the whole case up to that time, whether the notice should be given or not. I voted with those who were against giving the notice at that time, because I thought simple justice required it. Although I was opposed to the original appropriation, I was not willing, upon any consideration, to depart from the line which, in my judgment, simple truth,

SENATE.

honor, and justice required me to pursue. This is enough, therefore, to show that I feel no sentiment of hostility towards this company.

Now, sir, what is the proposition that I have submitted to the Senate? All I have said is intended to illustrate the fairness of it? I propose simply that the Senate, since it has determined to relinquish the control of the notice over this line, shall require some concession from the contractors corresponding to the benefit which they are to receive. I propose, since the Senate has determined to concur in the proposition of the House, and surrender the power to give notice, to require of the contractors a consent in some limitation in point of time. The contract was originally for $385,000. In 1852, the sum of $473,000 was added as temporary compensation. They have now had the benefit of that for three years. From 1852 up to 1855, they have had the benefit of this more than duplication of the original contract compensation. Give them that double compensation for one year or two years longer, if it is necessary; but then, after that, recur to the ordinary policy of the Government, and place this line, as well as every other line, as you reach it, under the control of the Post Office Department. Let the Postmaster General advertise for contracts. Let those contracts be reported to Congress, with a view to such general legislation as may be adopted, as will regulate the discretion of the Postmaster General in making permanent arrangements. Is there anything unjust in that? It gives the additional compensation. It gives it without the power to withdraw it. It gives it for two years. We were assured that they would be remunerated in 1854, but this still gives the additional compensation two years longer-up to 1857. It insures to these contractors about $1,000,000 over what was contemplated by the act of 1852. It only requires consent on their part that the contract shall then be put upon the footing of all other mail contracts. What then will be the condition of the proprietors of this line? Better, certainly, than that of any body else in relation to this service. They can come in with their propositions. They will have their ships. They will have their experience. They will have their skilled and practiced officers. They can compete with great advantage for the contract for this service. Ought they not to be required to consent to this? Having all these advantages, can they not offer better terms to the Government than other persons? If they do, will they not get the contract for an additional term? It seems to me nothing can be more fair, nothing clearer than this.

We have been told about the necessity of having these lines. Sir, you will have steam lines whether the patronage of the Government be extended to them or not. American energy, American enterprise, and American skill, with the impulse which they have already received from the past patronage of the Government, can defy the world. I have not the slightest fear but that we shall be able to compete on the ocean, as we compete on the land, with any nation on the face of the earth. Let the energies of the people be unrestricted and unconfined; give no extraordinary patronage to particular ports or to particular lines, and, my word for it, you will have a competition which will more than make good all the promises made in behalf of this line. Let us have competition. That is said to be the life of trade. That is the best security of the Government against imposition by favorites and particular contractors. I have no fears whatever but that the wants of the commanity will be met; that the postages will be cheapened, instead of being made dearer, and that passages upon the ocean will be as swift and as cheap as they are now. For one, sir, I do not want a splendid Government. I desire no excessive revenues. I am against this lavish expenditure with both hands. I wish to see the national revenues diminished. Limited revenue is the only guar antee. Economical expenditure, moderate revenue, and light taxes will make a frugal Government and a rich people; and if we adopt the amendment which I have had the honor to submit, it will be a step towards economy-not a great step, I admit, but still a step in the right direction. I trust it may be taken.

Mr. BAYARD. I should not have taken any part in this discussion if, as I had hoped, it had