APRIL 12, 1828.] Tariff Bill. [H. OF R. natory of an act, which, though valid, had been misun-country; and those who desire to protect the manufac derstood.] THE TARIFF BILL. The House again resumed the consideration of this bill, and the question being on the following amendment offered by Mr. WRIGHT, of Ohio: ture of woollen goods, desire to protect, equally with the manufacturer, the grower of the raw material. In this I heartily concur, and my proposition springs from a desire of attaining, as near as may be, that equality. Now, sir, how is the fact? The amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SUTHERLAND] proposes to impose an ad valorem duty on wool of 40 per cent., to increase by regular gradation to 50 per cent. ad valorem, and it proposes a specific duty of 4 cents a pound. I am correct when I say this is unequal in reference to the proposed duty on cloth. The raw material is bulky in proportion to its value-it pays in proportion greater freight than the manufactured article, which is increased "Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That, from and af. ter the first day of January, 1829, no credit for duties shall be allowed on any manufactures of wool, belong ing to any foreign manufacturer; and that the duty on all such manufactures shall be paid at the time when the same shall be entered, deducting there from such dis count as may be allowed, under the 27th section of the Collection Law, passed March 1st, 1828:" Mr. STEWART suggested to Mr. WRIGHT to with-in value by all the labor and profit of manufacturing, and draw it, in order to give place to an amendment which he wished to present, the effect of which would be to strike out from the amendment of Mr. SUTHERLAND, the clause which directs the duty on imported goods to be estimated on the value at the place whence import ed, and insert at the place where imported, viz: in the United States. cents. reduced in bulk. The common principle, therefore, is to impose heavier duties upon the lighter and more valuable manufactured article than upon the raw material. I shall be found correct, sir, when I say, that the duty; proposed on low priced raw wool, of no greater value than 8 cents, is much lighter than that proposed on woollens. Four cents specific duty on wool costing not ov The CHAIR decided that this amendment could not er 8 cents the pound is, at least, 50 per cent. ad valorem; be received, because the whole of Mr. SUTHERLAND'S then you propose in addition an ad valorem duty of 40 had been agreed to by the House; and although it was per cent. to rise up to 50; so that 90 per cent. is propos open to be amended by adding to it, it could not be altered on wool, in the first instance, to rise to 100 per cent., ed by striking out any of the words to which the House while on cloth 40 per cent. ad valorem only is proposed. had agreed. The inequality and injustice of this will appear to every Mr. WRIGHT then moved to amend Mr. SUTHER- one, at once. It may be all fair; but, sir, it seems to hold LAND' amendment by adding the word "five" after out one thing, while it performs another-it seems to the word "twenty" the effect of which would be to give the market to the wool grower, while it aims a blow make the duty on woollen cloth, at and under fifty cents at the root of the manufacture, ruins it, and so destroys the square yard, amount to twenty-five, instead of twenty sign of the proposition, but is not such its natural tenthe market altogether. I do not say, that such is the deMr. McDUFFIE inquired whether such an amendment dency? I wish to amend and to bring the raw material would be in order? The CHAIR replied that it was, as it and the manufactured article, at least upon the same footwent only to add to, not to alter, the words of the amending, as to the nominal amount, leaving the advantage in ment, and the same amount of duty had been previously farmers well know, that their only market for wool is at favor of the raw material, derivable from its bulk. Our home; at our own manufactories-they are not to be deceived into the belief, that after the destruction of those manufactories, however high your duty on wool, they will have any market whatever. Sir, all low priced goods, Pade of the coarse wool, so highly protected, and ranging be supplied to our market by foreigners; our own manu in price between 334 and 50 cents the square yard, will facturers of those goods will be ruined, and the entire market for coarse wool, grown in our country, will be cut off. If I am asked, why? I answer because, by your duty, you make the coarse wool cost the manufacturer more than he can sell it for when he has been at the expense of manufacturing it into cloth. This I think will be the effect of the proposition as it now stands-let us then equalise this duty, save the manufacturer of coarse goods from ruin, put him on a fair footing with the foreign fabricator, and enable him to purchase and manufac} ture the coarse wool of your farmer. The amendment I offer will go far to produce this result. moved in Committee of the Whole. Mr. MARTINDALE spoke in support of the amend. ment of Mr. WRIGHT, and read a statistical statement going to prove that not a yard of the milled cloth commonly worn by farmers and laborers could be made under a dollar, or at the very lowest, under seventy five cents. Twenty cents would protect flannels and carpet. ings, but not milled cloths. Mr. McDUFFIE again rose to order, and asked if any amendment could be received, which, (although by add. ing, and not taking away, any words) produced a result incompatible with the amendment as already adopted? The SPEAKER replied it was perfectly in order. The Chair had no right to judge on the point of compatibility; that was for the House. Mr. STEVENSON, of Pennsylvania, inquired whether it could be in order to increase twenty to twenty-five after the House had adopted twenty? The SPEAKER again replied that it was in order to add any words whatever. Mr. STEVENSON then opposed the amendment of Mr. WRIGHT, as going beyond any proposition which had hitherto been approved. The utmost extent, hitherto, had been 40 per cent.-this was 50, as it laid a tax of 25 cents on cloth worth 50 cents, and this on a fabric used by the poorer class of citizens. Mr. MARTINDALE replied, and defended the amend ment, as going to accomplish the gentleman's favorite object of introducing the common wool of the country into our own manufactures, and thus securing a home market for the farmer. Mr. WRIGHT, of Ohio, said: My object, sir, in offering this amendment, I will state in a very few words. It is the professed object of those who reported this bill, to protect the agricultural and manufacturing interest of the The question was now taken on Mr. WRIGHT'S amendment, and it was rejected by Yeas and Nays: Yeas 84-Nays 115. Mr. STEWART then moved an amendment to the 3d, 4th, 5th, and 6th paragraphs of the second section, as amended on the motion of Mr. SUTHERLAND. On this amendment Mr. WOODCOCK demanded the Yeas and Nays, and they were ordered by the House. Mr. M'DUFFIE again urged the question of order, denying that the amendment of Mr. STEWART could be received, it being inconsistent with what had been already adopted by the House. The SPEAKER pronounced it to be in order-whereupon, Mr. M'DUFFIE appealed from the decision. The CHAIR then stated his decision, and the appeal II. OF R.] Tariff Bill. [APRIL 12, 1828. Mr. M. replied, that it had been contained in an amend ment offered there by a gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. BATES.] Mr. M. then explained the objects of his amendment, and demanded that the question on it be taken by yeas and nays. They were orderd by the House; and after some remarks of Mr. MALLARY, who expressed his earnest hope that no more time would be occupied in offering and rejecting new amendments, The question was decided in the negative, by yeas and which had been taken. The gentleman from Vermont, [Here the SPEAKER read from a work on Parlimentary Law, a section applying directly to the case.] Mr. M'DUFFIE thereupon declared himself satisfied, and withdrew his appeal. The question was then taken on the amendment of Mr. STEWART, and it was rejected, by Yeas and Nays: Yeas 35 Nays 110, Mr. STEWART then offered to amend the amendment of Mr. SUTHERLAND, by adding thereto the following proviso: "Provided, That after the 1st day of January, 1829, the ad valorem duty on manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component part, shall be estimated and assessed on the actual value of such manufacture, at the port or place into which the same shall be imported." Mr. BARNEY objected to this amendment, on the ground that the 40 per cent. ad valorem would have to be counted on the original cost of the imported goods, as augmented by all the subsequent charges. Mr. INGHAM said, that as he was decidedly in favor of the principle contained in the amendment, it was incum. bent on him to explain the reason that would govern his vote upon it. It should be observed that a change of the whole principle would be attended with some difficulties, unless we make provision for carrying it into effect-the goods must be valued; for which provision must be made and the principles of the valuation determined, and authority given to the officers of the custom to appraise. This valuation should be made on the price of the goods exclusive of duty. Should this amendment be inserted in the bill in this crude and ill digested form, we cannot modify it; and in its present form, should the bill pass, the measure could not be executed. Mr. I. regretted to see it placed in such a shape that he was obliged to vote against it. Mr. OAKLEY took the same ground, and thought it better to have a distinct bill, containing all the corresponding measures necessary to accompany the proposed change in the mode of assessing duties. Mr. MARTINDALE thought this delay unnecessary all the necessary provisions could as well be made now. The question was then taken on the proviso, and decided in the negative, by yeas and nays:-Yeas 74-Nays 126. Mr. MARTINDALE then offered the following amend ment : Mr. WRIGHT, of Ohio, now inquired whether it would be in order to move to strike out the whole of the amendment of Mr. SUTHERLAND, together with a part of the original bill? The SPEAKER replied in the negative. Mr. WRIGHT, of Ohio, then moved the following proviso, to come in at the end of the first clause of the amendment: "Provided, That wool, the actual value of which, at the place whence imported, shall not be more than eight cents, shall, until the 30th day of June, 1829, only pay a duty of 35 per cent. on such value." On this amendment, Mr. W. asked the yeas and nays. They were ordered, and the question being taken, the proviso was rejected, by yeas and nays: Yeas 80-Nays 112. Mr. WOODS, of Ohio, moved to amend the original bill, by striking out from the fifteenth to the forty-seventh lines of the second section of the bill, and inserting in lieu thereof, an amendment which he submitted. The SPEAKER pronounced such a motion not in or der, as the whole of the portion of the bill which the amendment referred to, saving that portion from the fif teenth to the twentieth line of the second section of the bill, had been stricken out by the amendment already adopted, and other matter substituted in their stead. This motion involved the striking out of that matter; which was not in order. Mr. WOODS appealed from this decision, on the ground that it was in order to make a part of a bill, proposed to be stricken out, as perfect as possible, before the question on striking out was put. What he now offered was part of the amendment before moved by the gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. MALLARY] ; the House, it was true, had preferred the amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. SUTHERLAND); but it was possible they might yet prefer what he offered, when taken in con nexion with the second paragraph of the second section of the original bill. Mr. TAYLOR was understood, by the reporter, as supporting this view. The question being then put, the decision of the Chair was sustained, without a count. The question now recurring on the adoption of Mr. MALLARY'S amendment, as amended by Mr. SUTHERLAND, Mr. BARTLETT objected to it, as retaining the third and fourth paragraphs of the second section of the billto which he had always been opposed. If the amend ments were rejected, these sections would be open to amendment-the effect of them would be to diminish the present duties 3 per cent. Mr. WRIGHT said he did not rise to argue the ques tion. His only object was to appeal to the honorable gentleman from New-Hampshire, [Mr. BARTLETT] 10 vote for the amendment upon his own doctrine. The honor able gentleman says the reason why he shall not vote for it, (and this is the only reason he offers,) is, that its ef fect will be to reduce the present duty. I shall always that be willing to be advised by that gentleman, when Lam mistaken, and I feel sure, if I shall succeed in convincing Com-him that he is entirely wrong, his candor will compel him to vote with me, for the same reason which he now "Add at the end of the third paragraph of the second section, "Until the 30th day of June, 1829, and after time, a duty of one dollar on every square yard.” The CHAIR inquired if it had been offered in mittee of the Whole? APRIL 14, 1828.] Deported Slaves. [H. of R. NAYS.-Messrs. Bartlett, Bates, of Mo. Blake, Buckner, Clark, of Ky. Davis, of Mass. Everett, of Mass. Jennings, Long, McKee, Owen, Randolph, Sinith, of Indiana, Taliaferro, Tucker, of S. C. John J. Wood, Wright, of Ohio-17. So the House adopted Mr. SUTHERLAND's amendment, in the following words: "1st. On all unmanufactured wool 4 cents per pound; and also in addition thereto, 40 per cent. ad valorem, until the 30th day of June, 1829, from which time, an additional ad valorem duty of five per cent. shall be imposed annually, until the whole of said ad valorem duty shall amount to fifty per cent. And all wool, imported on the skin, shall be estimated as to weight and value, and shall pay the same rate of duties as other imported wool. If I understood the gives why he will vote against me. gentleman, (and if I did not he will correct me,) he said that the clauses of the bill to which he referred would, in effect, diminish the present duty upon the cloths embraced in them. He lays it down as a correct interpretation of the present law, that a duty of 33 per cent. ad valorem, is equal to a duty of 43 per cent. or that a duty of 40 per cent. ad valorem is equal to a duty of 50 per cent. In other words, the honorable member seems to think, that, by the manner of estimating the duty, 10 per cent. is to be added to the ad valorem duty fixed by the law as the correct duty upon the goods. The gentleman compliments me by saying I am learned in the law. He has the law in his hands, and I will not "2d. On manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall speak with his confidence. I will only say, he may be mistaken. I now ask the gentleman, who is a very atten- be a component part, (except carpetings, blankets, worsted tive listener, to bring to his remembrance the arguments suff goods, bombazines, hosiery, mits, gloves, caps, and bindwhich have been used, during the whole of this debate, by ings,) the actual value of which, at the place whence importhis own side of the House; to turn his eye to the numerous ed, shall not exceed fifty cents the square yard, there shall be calculations which have been made, and some of which are levied, collected, and paid, 20 cents on every square yard: Provided, That on all manufactures of wool, except flannels upon our tables. He will then find, I think, that an ad va- and baizes, the actual value of which, at the place whence imlorem duty of 33 per ct. in the manner of collecting dufourteen cents per square yard. ties, is only equal to 36 2-3 cents upon the hundred cents.ported, shall not exceed 33 1-3 cents per square yard, shall If he will recur to the law again, I think he will find this The question was now, at length, taken on Mr. MAL. nays, as follows: pay 3d. On all manufactures of wool, or of which woo! shall be, a component part (except as aforesaid) the actual value of which, at the place whence imported, shall exceed fifty cents the square yard, and shall not exceed one dollar the square yard there shall be levied, collected, and paid, a duty of 40 cents on every square yard. “4th. On all manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component part, except as aforesaid, the actual value of which, at the place whence imported, shall exceed one dollar the square yard, and shall not exceed two dollars and fifty cents the square yard, there shall be levied, collected, and paid, a duty of one dollar on every square yard. 66 5th. All manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component part, except as aforesaid, the actual value of which, at the place whence imported, shall exceed two dollars and fifty cents, the square yard, and shall not exceed four dollars the square yard, shall be deemed to have cost at the place whence imported, four dollars the square yard, and a duty of forty per cent. ad valorem shall be levied, collected, and paid, on such valuation. "6th. On all manufactures of wool, or of which wool shall be a component part, except as aforesaid, the actual value of which at the place whence imported, shall exceed four dollars the square yard, there shall be levied, collected, and paid, a duty of forty-five per cent. ad valorem." Mr. WICKLIFFE now believing the debate had reached such a stage that the minds of all parties were made up, and that further discussion would lead to no benefi cial result, moved the previous question. But the House Ayes 78-Noes 125. rejected the motion. The House then adjourned. MONDAY, APRIL 14, 1828. YEAS.-Messrs. Alexander, Allen, of Mass. Allen, of Va. Alston, Anderson, of Me. Anderson, of Pa. Archer, Armstrong, Bailey, Baldwin, Barber, of Conn. John S. Barbour, Philip P. Barbour, Barker, Barlow, Barnard, Barney, Barringer, Bartley, Bates, of Mass. Beecher, Belden, Bell, Blair, Brent, Brown, Bryan, Buchanan, Buck, Bunner, Burges, Butman, Cambreleng, Carson, Carter, Chase, Chilton, Claiborne, Clark, of N. Y. Condict, Conner, Coulter, Creighton, Crockett, Crowninshield, Culpeper, Daniel, Davenport, of Va. Davenport, of Ohio, Davis, of S. C. De Graff, Desha, Dickinson, Dorsey, Drayton, Duncan, Dwight, Earll, Findlay, Floyd, of Virginia, Floyd, of Geo. Fort, Forward, Garrow, Gilmer, Gorham, Green, Gurley, Haile, Hallock, Hall, Hamilton, Haynes, Healy, Hobbie, Hodges, Hoffman, Holmes, Hunt, Ingersoll, Ingham, Isacks, Johns, Keese, King, Kremer, Lawrence, Lecompte, Lea, Leffler, Letcher, Mr. WICKLIFFE moved to discharge the Committee Little, Livingston, Locke, Lumpkin, Lyon, Magee, Mallary, Marable, Markell, Martindale, Martin, Marvin, Max- of the Whole from the further consideration of the bill well, Maynard, McCoy, McDuffie, McHatton, McIntire, to extend the time of the sitting of the Board of ComMcKean, McLean, Mercer, Merwin, Metcalfe, Miller, Mi-missioners under the treaty of Ghent, on the subject of ner, Mitchell, of Pa. Mitchell, of S. C. Mitchell, of Tenn. Moore, of Ky. Moore, of Alab. Newton, Nuckolls, Oakley, O'Brien, Orr, Pearce, Phelps, Pierson, Plant, Polk, Ramsay, Reed, Richardson, Ripley, Rives, Roane, Russell, Sergeant, Shepperd, Sloane, Smyth, of Va. Sprague, Sprigg, Stanberry, Stevenson, of Pa. Sterigere, Stewart, Storrs, Stower, Strong, Swan, Swift, Sutherland, Taylor, Thompson, of N. J. Thompson, of Geo. Tracy, Trezvant, Tucker, of N. J. Turner, Vance, Van Horn, Van Rensselaer, Varnum, Verplanck, Vinton, Wales, Ward, Washington, Weems, Whipple, Whittlesey, Wickliffe, Williams, Wilson, of Pa. Wingate, Silas Woods, Woods, of Ohio, Woodcock, Wolf, Wright of N. Y. Yancey-183. deported slaves, and urged, as a reason for this motion, the necessity that some decision should be had without farther delay upon that bill, inasmuch, as the commissioners had suspended all further proceedings until the pleasure of Congress upon that subject should be known The motion was opposed by Mr. GILMER, of Geo. on the ground that certain documents relating to this subtect, which had been ordered to be printed, had not yet been laid before the House, and were essential to a right decision of the question, whether the Board should sit longer or not. Mr. FLOYD, of Va. supported the motion of Mr. WICKLIFFE, considering it as very extraordinary that the Commissioners should have thought it necessary to suspend farther proceedings till this decision should be had. He presumed they would have gone on with their business, had not some officious and meddling agents in terfered. "or [APRIL 14, 1898 knew was calculated to give it a true view of this ques. tion. He put it to the gentleman to say, if his object was not to keep these documents out of the House, in order that money, which was fairly due to the claimants of Georgia and Alabama, might be withheld from them, and go into the pockets of the claimants from Virginia and Maryland. The gentleman has spoken of these documents as though they had been palmed upon the House, and the printing of them obtained in a surrep. titious manner. Here Mr. TALIAFERRO explained, and disclaimed all intention of making such a charge. What he had said did not refer to the importance of these documents in themselves. They were certainly very important in their bearing on the judicial question before the commissioners, but of no manner of importance to the question presented to this House. Mr. TALIAFERRO took the same side, and explain ed the facts of the case. The Board, when they determined to wait the decision of the House, had no conception that so much delay would have occurred, and had determined to occupy the time while the bill should be under consideration, in examining the testimony sub. mitted to them on the two classes of claims under their consideration. But the House had held the subject so long before them that the commissioners had gone through the whole of that examination, and were now without any thing to do. This presented a public reason why such a state of things ought not to continue; and a reason of a private character was to be found in the im Mr. GILMER replied, that he considered them as highmense amount of property, not less than 1,200,000 dol- ly important in enabling the House to understand whether lars, the fate of which was thus held in suspense. As to or no it was proper and necessary to prolong the time of the necessity of waiting until the documents referred to the sitting of the Board of Commissioners. Another could be printed, he believed that the printing of "Tom gentleman from Virginia [Mr. FLOYD] had said, in effect, Thumb,' "Goody Two Shoes," would have as that these documents had been presented by "intermuch legitimate connexion with the decision of the meddling and officious agents." The agents of the House on the bill before it. Those memorials had been claimants from Louisiana and Georgia had thought propresented or a day not set apart by the rules of the House per to present their petitions to this House. It was a for the receiving of memorials. The presentation of them right they enjoyed in common with all other persons, had not been expected by him, and took place in his ab- and they certainly might exercise it without being denosence, by the special indulgence of the House. They minated "officious and intermeddling." It made no had been ordered to be printed without any knowledge difference to this House whether the citizens addressof what they contained. He had taken the pains, to fol-ing it by memorial resided in Georgia and Louisiana, or low them from the Clerk's office to the printing office, in Virginia and Maryland. He trusted it was no more where he had examined them, and found that they pre- an intrusion on the House to present a petition from sented an ex parte statement, which, however correct, Georgia, than to present a petition from Virginia. Wherelated to the judicial question before the commissioners, ther the memorials, which he had had the honor to prea question of which the House had no cognizance. In sent, were respectful and decorous in their character, his view, the bill itself was of the same character, and or deserved to be called "officious and intermeddling," was framed with the intention of producing a similar would fully appear to the House, when they should be effect. printed and laid before it. He put it to every gentleman to say, whether he at present fully understood this subject or not. It was not possible that gentlemen could be acquainted with the facts of the case, unless they had learned them from the private statements of persons deeply and personally interested. He did not complain that such statements should have been made. He knew and admitted that gentlemen had a perfect right to make them. But such statements were not calculated to enlighten the whole House. It was very unpleasant to him to be obliged to advert to a view of the subject which he was now about to present, but gentlemen would all recollect the very novel and extraordinary application which had been made to them to give certain instructions to the committee to whom this bill had been referred; a mode of procedure, which, he believed, was without precedent or parallel. Yet now, when a single memorial is presented, and the printing of it has been ordered by the House, the same gentleman, [Mr. TALIAFERRO] who moved such extraordinary instructions to the committee, seeks to preclude the House from a perusal of it, and presses a decision upon the bill. One gentleman urges upon the House the necessity of an immediate decision, with a view to save expense, because the sitting of the Board involves the payment of the commissioners' salaries, and this argument is gravely presented to the House, when an interest to the amount of $1,200,000 is depending. Mr. G. said he was as willing to go into a scrutiny on the subject of the improper expenditure of public money, as any other member of the House; but when such an amount of property was at is sue, he considered prolongation of the salary of those officers who were to pass upon it, as a matter not to be mentioned, if, thereby, a more correct decision could be had. Another of the gentlemen from Virginia [Mr. BAR [Here Mr. T. was reminded by the Chair that that discussion was not in order.] Mr. P. P. BARBOUR said he would endeavor to state the reasons for which he was of opinion that the bill ought to be gone into without delay. Mr. B. here went into a recapitulation of the facts of this case, all of which have already appeared in the debate which took place when the bill was referred to the committee. He then stated the argument urged by the claimants in Virginia and Maryland, in favor of their claim, and that of the claimants from Georgia and Louisiana, in resistance to it, but cautiously avoided expressing any opinion as to the merits of either, and contended that it would be improper for the House to do so, as it was a question of a judicial character, which belonged exclusively to the commissioners. Whatever decision they should give, would be conclusive. The House, in his judgment, would have no power to interfere with it. If the commissioners should say that, under the circumstances, a prolongation of their period of session was requisite, in order to do justice to the parties, he should be in favor of allowing it to them. But the bill, without any regard to this condition, orders an unqualified continuance of their time of session, and leaves the time wholly indefinite. By passing the bill in this form, the House would be taking upon itself to decide that a prolongation was necessary. This was a decision which, in his apprehension, the commissioners alone were competent to decide. Mr. GILMER said, that, from what had fallen from the two gentlemen from Virginia, the House must be convinced of the importance of the bill. The object of the first gentleman from Virginia, who had spoken, evidently was, to preclude from the House that which he APRIL 14, 1828.] Tariff Bill. [H. or R. in lieu of the duties now imposed by law, on all import- In support of this amendment BOUR] had said, if the commissioners asked for a longer time to sit, he should be in favor of allowing it. But, did not the gentlemen, themselves, furnish a reply to this argument? Did they not urge upon the House that these commissioners were receiving high salaries? and could they expect that men, so situated, would not feel the delicacy of their situation too strongly to decide on such a question? Must they not perceive to what imputation they would subject themselves by so doing? The operation of the bill would not determine any judicial question; and he wished the decision delayed till the memorial should appear, in order that the House might see, with additional distinctness, the reasons why the sitting of the Board should be prolonged. The question at issue before the commissioners depended on the construction to be given to the Treaty of London. The claims of those residing in Georgia and Louisiana, had alreadying slates." been passed upon by the Board, and declared to come precisely within the meaning of that treaty. Their slaves were not only taken by the British, and deported, but they were taken within the limits of the United States. This had been satisfactorily proved, and, thereby, their claims had been brought within the express provisions Mr. HAILE went into a statement of facts in relation of the Treaty. But those who claimed from Virginia and to the past and present state of the culture of indigo in Maryland, were prepared only to prove that their slaves the United States. It was a plant, he observed, pecuhad been taken, but not to prove that they had been ta- | liarly well adapted to the soil and climate of the Southken within the limits of the United States. They con- ern portion of the Union. The culture of it was introtended, that, having established the first point, the seduced inte South Carolina by Miss Lucas, afterwards the cond point was to be presumed, unless the contrary was mother of Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, in the year shewn, and they threw the burden of this shewing on the 1741; and such was its progress, that, in seven years first set of claimants. The claimants from Georgia, though afterwards, the quantity exported from that State was they had proved the whole of what was required, and 216,924 pounds; and at a period shortly preceding the were, therefore, entitled to full compensation, had receiv- Revolutionary war, the amount had swelled to 1,117,060 ed only seventy five per cent. of their claims, after wait- pounds. Forty years ago it reached 2,000,000 pounds. ing twelve years. When the documents should be pub. The export declined, however, so as to fall, in 1793, to lished, it would appear to the House, that the proof 690,989 pounds; but it continued to occupy the attenwhich they had produced, though clear and convincing, tion of that State till the year 1807, at which period a and in itself sufficient and satisfactory, was wanting in revolution was produced in the history of manufactures, some formality as to the mode in which it had been ta by the invention of the Cotton Gin, a discovery for which ken; it wanted some notarial seal, or some verification | the ingenious and enterprising inventor was deservedly of that description. This could readily be supplied, if rewarded, by a donation from the Legislature, of $50,000. time would allow, and all they asked was the allowance The introduction of the improved machinery of Sir of that time. Mr. G. insisted that the very pressure of Richard Arkwright still farther advanced this change : the question at this moment, contained in itself the evi- and, in effect, gave birth to the cotton trade in this dence that the Virginia gentlemen believed that the pro- country. At the date of Mr. Jay's treaty, cotton was duction of these documents, and of this proof, would be scarcely known in the United States; but so rapidly did fatal to their hopes, and this was the reason why the its cultivation spread, that its product soon increased, Board of Commissioners were to be refused a longer time in amount, from a thousand to a million of bales; realisof session; the result of which would be, that the claim-ing to the planters a revenue of more than $25,000,000 ants from Virginia and Maryland would receive the mo- This was the real cause of the decline in the culture of ney which was justly due, and which, if time were allow- indigo. The cotton plant was found so welcome and ed, could be proved to be justly due, not to them, but to profitable a guest, that it soon turned out the previous the claimants from Georgia and Louisiana, who would be occupant of the soil. Indigo ceased to be produced, able to shew that the slaves from Virginia, and Mary- and instead of exporters, the People of the South soon land had been lawfully taken in time of war, and not un- became importers of that commodity. But now the lawfully deported from within the limits of the United state of things was returning which had existed before States, and, therefore, did not come within the provisions the cotton gin was known. The price of cotton had of the treaty. fallen, to such a degree, that it had ceased to be a pro [At this point of the debate the hour allotted to morn-fitable crop; and the inhabitants of the South would ing business expired, and its further prosecution was arrested by the Chair.] Mr. FLOYD moved to postpone the Orders of the Day, in order that the discussion might be continued; but the motion was negatived-and the House then proceeded to the Orders of the Day, and resumed the considera tion of once more be obliged to direct their attention to the culture of indigo. And why should not a protecting duty be imposed upon this, as well as other products of American industry? Gentlemen were making the bill resemble a pedlar's wagon, by the number and mixed character of the items it contained. Why not, when loading it with all sorts of notions, throw in a little indigo among the rest? It was necessary, to complete an assorted cargo. This would be "encouraging the agricultural interest." Nothing was more easily raised than this plant. In five years enough might be raised to supply not only the United States but all Europe into the bargain. And surely, if Northern gentlemen insisted on taxing those of the South for every pound of wool, |