The question was then taken upon Mr. KNIGHT'S amendment, and lost.

[SENATE.

keepers, as to the printer; that they were all provided for by the constitution. In former times, very learned and worthy men had passed the resolution fixing the choice of printer, and he considered the experience of nine years as worth something in matters of legislation. But, according to the gentleman from Maryland, no person but the President of the United States could appoint the officers of the Senate.

Mr. KNIGHT said, that gentlemen did not yet seem to understand his proposition. It did not go to the effect that the Senate should elect the individual who should send in the lowest proposals. It was merely calling for informa- Mr. CHAMBERS repeated the reasons to show that the tion; the Senate could choose whom they pleased. The printer was the officer of the Senate, and asked how he whole length and breadth of his proposition was to get in- could be considered the officer of the Government at formation, that they might act upon the subject under-large,or any one of the other departments of the Government, standingly. constituted, directed, controlled, and destroyed as he was by the Senate alone. The instances mentioned of the Secretary and Sergent-at-arms, were precisely analogous in principle to that of the printer. The power of the Senate to appoint them was derived from the same clause in the constitution, and it had never been deemed necessary or proper to invoke the aid of the House of Representatives or the President to direct our proceedings in relation to their appointment. He would, however, ask the gentleman from Tennessee, whether the printer to the Senate was, or was not, an officer of the Senate ?

The question then recurred upon the adoption of Mr. EATON'S resolution.

Mr. EATON apologized for the misconstruction he had put upon the remarks of the gentleman from Maryland, and replied to his question, that the printer was not an officer of the Senate.

Mr. CHAMBERS.-If he is not an officer of the Senate, whose officer is he? He is elected by the Senate, and if he is not the officer of the Government, or of a Depart ment, it necessarily followed that he was the officer of the Senate.

Mr. CHAMBERS said he had never been satisfied that this was a proper subject for legislation. The constitution had, by the most express terms, given authority to the Senate alone to choose its own officers, and he could not perceive the propriety of calling in the aid of the other branches of the Government to assist them in exercising this power. He read the clause of the constitution conferring the power. The only question is, whether the printer be the officer of the Senate, and he presumed no doubt could be entertained about it. He was not the officer of the Government, regarding it as composed of the three legislative branches: they do not unite in his election, in the designation of his duties, nor do they exercise any control over him. He was appointed by the Senate alone; his duties were directed by the order of the Senate; and, as had been assumed in debate, and he supposed properly Mr. WOODBURY asked for the reading of the amendassumed, his official existence might be terminated by them.ment, and it was read accordingly. If, then, he be the officer of this body, and the consti- A division of the question was then called for, and it tution gave to this body the sole power to appoint, it was was determined first to take the question on striking out. necessarily the constitutional right of the Senate alone, to Mr. TAZEWELL said, if he understood the amenddetermine the manner of their proceeding in the appointment of the gentleman from Maryland, it went to do away ment. The only argument which he could anticipate was, that the joint resolution of 1819, (which had all the forms of a law,) had still left the act of appointment to be performed by the Senate. This argument admitted legislation on the subject to be entirely unnecessary and superfluous. But it is not exactly in conformity with the facts of the case: the resolution of the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. EATON) goes upon the principle, that the law must be altered before the Senate can control the manner of their own proceedings; it looks to the provisions as binding upon the Senate in its substance and in its form, and professes to derive all our authority, not from the constitution, whence it arises, but from this legislative act.

with the whole of the joint resolution of 1819. Nine-tenths of that resolution goes to describe the duties of the printer. Did the gentleman mean to do away with the resolution altogether? I will read the resolution, (said Mr. T.) for the gentleman's information. [Mr. T. read that part of the resolution which describes the manner in which the work shall be done, and then added] and in this way it goes on. Surely the gentleman does not mean to do away with all this. If this be his object, or if it be not, let me make a remark or two. Is there no danger of the two Houses, in electing their printer, coming into contact? for, while the printer to one shall do his work in pica, the printer to the other may do it in brevier, &c. Hence the necessity for the joint The propriety of revising the whole system seemed to resolution, defining the manner in which the work shall be be conceded by some, because they were already per- done, to produce a uniformity in its execution, and in the suaded the prices paid were extravagant; by others, be- prices. With regard to a violation of the constitution, he cause they had doubts, and by others because they were disagreed with the Senator from Tennessee, and concurred willing to receive information. By repealing the law or with the Senator from Maryland, that the printer to the joint resolution of 1819, the power of the Senate would be Senate was an officer of the Senate, and this he derived made to rest, as he thought it should, upon the positive from the constitution. The constitution had prescribed provision of the constitution; and at a future and conve- the powers of Congress, and provided for the passage of nient day in the session a committee might be raised to such and such laws." But it is said we must not use in our regulate the system of duties, emoluments, and other mat-laws the terms made use of in the constitution. And why ters connected with it, as the deliberate judgment of the Senate should find to be proper. These considerations induced him to move to strike out all after the enacting clause, and insert the following: "That the joint resolution, approved the 3d of March, 1819, entitled A resolution directing the manner in which the printing of Congress shall be executed, fixing the prices thereof, and providing for the appointment of a printer or printers,' be, and the same is hereby, repealed."

not? The constitution provided for the impeachment of Judges, declared the tenure of their office-that they should hold them during good behavior, &c. &c.; and shall we not say that Judges may be impeached, and fix the tenure of their office? Every law may contain the exact words of the constitution. And do you, in using them, do that which is wrong? With regard to the printing of Congress, each House had always the power to appoint their printer, and each House had always exercised it; but mischief had resulted from the mode of appointment, and Mr. EATON replied, that the same principle applied to prevent its recurrence again, the joint resolution of also to the election of the Sergeant-at-arms, and the Door-1819 was passed. In this, both parties agreed. Some le

The Lead Mines in Missouri.

Mr. NOBLE said, he did not wish to intrude: but we had all to answer for our sins, and he presumed we should all have to do it on the same plan. The resolution had not yet been referred to a Committee. He thought it should take that course, and he would move its reference to the Committee on the Judiciary. If it did not go to that Committce, he should be in favor of referring it to the Committee on the Contingent Expenses of the Senate. It would then come under the eye of the intelligent gentleman from Illinois, (Mr. KANE) who, from his remarks to-day, had evidently given his attention to the subject. If in order, he would move that the resolution and amendment be re-stretch the sceptre of barrenness over the whole of the ferred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

wealth of the country? Is not this the general treasure, purchased by the public money? Is Missouri alone interested in these lead mines? No, sir, this is the public property. He would ask the honorable senator, if the mines belonged to the State of Missouri, whether he would be so willing to throw them into the market now? Would he not keep them until there was a demand for them? Would he not wait until a more propitious period? He [Mr B.] thought he would.

Mr. BARTON said, the Senate must be well acquainted with the fact, that, at the time the State of Louisiana was purchased, the Missouri mines were but little known, and that the general idea was, that they were immensely valuable. Among the first laws passed by the State of Louisiana, was one making large reservations of land, in the neighborhood of these mines. Since that time, much more was known of the mines than at that early period. It was now known, that almost the whole of the southern part of the State of Missouri, which was a broken and poor country, was a mineral country. It was also known, that the

[SENATE.

which had been reported by the Committee on the Public Lands, and stated that the question would be upon the amendment; which was explained by Mr. BARTON.

Mr. BENTON then replied, that very ample reports had been made, both by Government agents and others. The United States appointed an agent there, many years ago, with a salary of $1,500 dollars per annum, who had examined the country; and reports had also been made by persons who had been a long time resident in that country. As it was early in the session, he was willing the bill should lie over, that the gentleman might examine the reports on the subject.

The question being taken on the amendment proposed by the committee, it was adopted, and the bill was then ordered to be engrossed for a third reading. Adjourned to Monday.

MONDAY, DEC. 22, 1828.

The Senate was principally occupied this day in discussing a bill for the relief of Susan Decatur et al.

TUESDAY, DEC. 23, 1828.

COMMERCE OF THE WEST.

A bill allowing duties on foreign merchandise, imported into Louisville, Pittsburg, Cincinnati, and St. Louis, to be secured and paid at those places," was taken up and considered.

Mr. WOODBURY (Chairman of the Committee on Commerce) said, this was the same bill which had been before that committee, and passed the Senate, at its last session, but was not acted upon in the House of Representatives. Full security was afforded to the public, by its provisions, that the duties would be paid; and, as the convenience of the merchants of the Western country would be promoted, and the public lose nothing by the proposed arrangement, he saw no obstacle to the passage of the bill.

Mr. MARKS said, he recollected that, two sessions since, he had presented a memorial from the merchants of Pittsburg, praying that that place might be made a port of entry. Since that time, he had understood that the citizens of Pittsburg did not require the passage of a law on the subject; they were altogether indifferent to its passage, and he was not certain whether they would approve of it. He merely rose to give the Senate this information. It was altogether immaterial to him what order the Senate took upon the bill.

most valuable lead mines in the United States were north of the State of Missouri. The Spanish lead mine was there, and the whole of the valuable mineral country was in a triangle, made by the boundary line of Missouri and the Mississippi river. It was necessary for the United States to cover this country with tenantry, and their mines were almost inexhaustible. The whole of this other country had been examined, and people were anxious to work it. The mining business was known to be extremely uncertain, and it was also extremely fascinating; it was something like gambling, exciting high hopes, which were frequently not realized. Under the present United States' laws, several cases had occurred in which lands had been sold to individuals, and lead ore afterwards being discovered upon the lands, the patents were withheld. Now the Government did not want these lands; they had already inexhaustible stores in the Spanish mine, the Fever river lead mines, in the State of Illinois, and upon the east and west sides of the Mississippi. The project of this bill was not to force the sale. The gentleman from North Carolina had supposed, that, because the Government could dispose of them, they must necessarily; but it did not follow; the President of the United States might have firmness enough to resist improper importunities. He would state a case of the difficulty of which he had complained. In the village of Belle Vue, a tract of land had been sold by the Government to an individual as long ago as the year 1806; lately, ore has been discovered, not upon his tract, but in the neighborhood of it, in another part of the town, Mr. WOODBURY said, the gentleman from Pennsylvain consequence of which his patent had been withdrawn. nia had not, certainly, paid attention to the provisions of Under this state of things, in the course of time, almost the bill. He would state, for his information, that the bill the whole State of Missouri will be reserved, and withheld did not provide for the establishment of ports of entry: from sale, and subject to this system. The mines on the it was not the intention of the committee to make such a Upper Missouri, and north of the State, were so much provision. It was at first contemplated; but, for himself, more valuable, and, as they were worked, the settlers and he was against it. The bill provides merely that the du laborers had left the State of Missouri and gone up to ties on goods to be imported into Louisville, &c. shall be them. This bill only abolished the law of reservation and secured to be paid at those places: the bonds will then be restriction, which had been found to be extremely injurious sent to New Orleans, and paid at such places as the colto that country, and which must ultimately be the ruin of it. lector of that port might direct. While on the floor, he Mr. CHANDLER observed, that, as the gentlemen would state, that an amendment had been made to the bill, from Missouri must know more of the subject than they at the last session, which was not contained in it as introwho lived at a greater distance, he would ask them if this duced by the senator from Missouri, viz. to include land had ever been surveyed by authority of the Govern- "Nashville, in the State of Tennessee," as one of the ment, and whether there were any reports upon the sub-places at which, also, duties on foreign merchandise might ject; if so, he should like to see them, that he might have some more information, and make up his mind-as it might be advisable to sell all these lands, or it might be better to sell only a part. There were always many speculators about a new country, and, as the gentleman from North Carolina very justly observed, if the President once had the liberty, he would be constantly importuned until he had thrown the whole of them into the market.

The PRESIDENT here read an amendment to the bill,
VOL. V.-2.

be secured to be paid. For the purpose of extending the same privilege to that place, he would move that the words he had named be inserted in the bill.

The motion of Mr. W. prevailed.

Mr. MARKS explained, that he had not paid attention to the provisions of the bill, and repeated, it was immaterial to him whether it passed or no.

Mr. BENTON stated, that the object of the bill was to give facilities to those persons in the Western country

SENATE.]

School Lands in Alabama.

who were engaged in foreign commerce.
The bill was
under the consideration of the Committee of Commerce,
when a distinguished senator from Massachusetts [Mr.
LLOYD] was its Chairman. He approved of making the
places named in the bill ports of entry. Since then, that
committee had contemplated a different method, which
was considered more safe. For years past, foreign goods
had been imported into the Western country, consigned
to merchants in the interior, from the Port of Liverpool
in particular. New Orleans was the port of delivery, and
the consignees had to pay two or three per cent. to com-
mission merchants to attend to the transshipment of their
property, and the security of the duties upon it. This
was one hardship. Another was, the great advance of
money which it cost them to have the business attended
to. It was a fact, that some of the interior towns were
nearer to the Gulf of Mexico than New Orleans was fif-
teen years ago.
These merchants can attend to their own
business quite as well, if not better, than it is now attend-
ed to at New Orleans, and the Government be equally se-
cure in the payment of the duties, while it would be a
great accommodation to those merchants, if the bill should
pass. As far as the change contemplated by the bill was
known, it had given general satisfaction; it would be of
great advantage to the commerce of the West, if it should
become a law, and, certainly, would be of no material in-
jury to the country. He, therefore, hoped it would pass.
The question was then taken on ordering the bill to be
engrossed for a third reading, and decided in the affirma-

tive.

SCHOOL LANDS IN ALABAMA.

A bill "authorizing the relinquishment of the sixteenth section granted for the use of schools in Alabama, and entering of other lands in lieu thereof," was then taken up for consideration as in Committee of the Whole.

[The bill provides, that, where the 16th section in each township, granted for the use of schools, was unproductive, it should be given up, and four quarter sections of other lands, of good quality, entered in lieu thereof.]

Mr. CHANDLER said, he should like to hear a satisfactory explanation given why the State of Alabama should have a preference over other States in relinquish ing unproductive school lands, and selecting four quarter sections of land, of good quality, in lieu of a whole section. Mr. KING called for the reading of the memorial of the Legislature of the State of Alabama instructing their Senators and Representatives to attend to the subject of the school lands. [The memorial wasread, stating the unproductive quality of some of the school lands, and the wish to be authorized to select others in their stead.]

Mr. K. then stated, that the object of Government in setting apart the 16th section of land in each township was to provide for the education of indigent children. A great proportion of country in that State, particularly the part from which he came, it was well known, was barren and unproductive. Where the sixteenth section proved to be good land, and answered the purpose for which it was granted, there was, of course, no wish to relinquish it; this was the case where it was in the vicinity of a stream, and laid low; otherwise, it was valueless, and altogether unfit for the purpose for which it was granted. In such cases, a sufficiency could not be raised from the land to contribute to the payment of schooling; the poor could, in consequence, obtain nothing, and, therefore, the desire to give it up, and enter other land in its stead-such lands as had been offered at public sale, and would not bring the minimum price. This was no departure from the original system. The object was, if there was any object, to grant lands which should help to defray the expenses of education, and not those which were altogether unproductive. The lands might as well have been withheld. The people for whose benefit a change of lands was asked

[DEC. 23, 1828. were very indigent, and could not pay the expense of schooling; and it was because sufficient means could not be collected from the lands granted, that a change of lands was required, to defray that expense.

Mr. CHANDLER said, that, from what he could understand, the good lands in Alabama were divided into quarter sections. His object was, to strike out the provision for granting four quarter sections in lieu of the section to be surrendered, and to give section for section, if the change must be made. He foresaw that this matter would not end here. Grant this request of the State of Alabama, (said he) and other States would ask for a similar privilege, where the same advantage was to be obtained. He had no doubt of it.

Mr. BARTON said, he thought the request of the State of Alabama unreasonable. She had made the compact with the United States, and, he thought, to use a common phrase, that she ought to be contented with her bargain. He thought there was a principle involved in this grant, and he did not see where the thing would stop. There was not a single one of the new States, which had been admitted into the Union upon similar terms, but what had many poor sections, and which would make the same request; therefore, if this bill passed at all, he thought an amendment should be introduced, providing for extending the same privilege to all the other States. He preferred, however, not beginning this system at all.

Mr. CHANDLER then moved to amend the bill by striking out the provision for selecting other lands from land districts, and inserting from townships.

Mr. KING said, he was under the impression, when he introduced the bill to the Senate, that it would pass without any opposition. He had supposed that the Senate of the United States was the last body in the world that would throw out any obstacles to the instruction of youth. The Government, when it laid out the lands, had provided that every township of six miles square should have a certain portion allotted to it, and set off, for the benefit of schools. Now it appeared that a great portion of this land turned out to be good for nothing; and were they to be told that it was a compact made with the Government? He said, if they were to be confined to the very township in which the present lands were located, in nine cases out of ten the passage of the law would be worth nothing at all. The location of this sixteenth section was accidental: some of the lands were good, some of them very valuable, and the towns in which such were situated were lucky; but in other townships the sixteenth section was a mere pine barren, and worth nothing at all; and they merely asked for the liberty to change their lands for some which belong to the United States, but for which the Government had been unable to obtain the minimum price of one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre. He had submitted to the first amendment without saying a word, although he knew that it would, in many cases, cut off the applicants altogether from the benefit intended.

The gentleman from Missouri had opposed this request of the State of Alabama, because he was afraid the thing would become general, and that other States would make similar applications; he had no such fear. Much of the land of Alabama was entirely unproductive and worthless; some of it, through which the streams run, was valuable and settled, but the other, which was mostly pine barrens, was not worth the cultivation, and the settlers upon this country who were not able to educate their children, asked of the Government that privilege. Suppose other States did come forward, being similarly situated, would the Senate of the United States say that they had made a compact, and that, if they could not afford to educate their children under it, that it could not be helped-that they had made a bargain? -If other States came forward, in such a situation he should have no hesitation in giving them the privilege they requested.