Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-04-13


three wears. This was agreed to.
Mr.. Talbot thought the bill ought to be post
poncd unit! some decision should be had upon
the Tariff bill, now before the other House.
| He moved the postpone:rcnt OF the bill to Mon
day next.
| MIR. Smith opposed the postponement, and adj
vocated the bill! to which Mr. Talbot replied.
He opposed the allowance of drawback OH cor
dage manufactured OF foreign hemp, on the
ground of its preiudcial operation upon the
domestic growth ofhcmp.
| MIR. Rugg'cs spoke i'll favor Of the bill. He
denied the position that the drawback would
operate aga nst the hemp Of our own growth
the drawba k being already allowed OH the OK
portation o; the hemp, ii not manufactured, he
thought the industry and skill of our own citi-
zens ought TO be encouraged, by giving them
the privilege of exporting this article, with the
benefit OF drawback when it has received the
additional value which their labor has given to
it. He ad,crtcd To the policy of England in re-
gard to her drawback system, and he contend
ed that this measure would give additional aid
To our commercial! and manufacturing interests;
and place us, in foreign markets, on footing
with the English. lie spoke particularly of
| the advantages that would result to us, in our
trade To South Amcreca, By the allowance of
drawback on this article.
|
between this bill and the tariff bill. lie was OPP
posed TO the principles of the bill! and in favor of
postponcncnt.
| Mr.. Lloyd, OF Mass thought the only consi-
deration iii favor of the postp6nement Of this
subject, was, its connection with the tariff bill.
1t had been for a long while before the Senate;
and the short time which remained for the trans
action fthc great mass of business before Con-
grcss, seemed to require, that 1t should be &C
ted upon. &c should, therefore, vote against
postpJnenent. Hecombatted the idea that the
measure would injure our domestic growth of
hemp. He thought it narrow policy, indeed,
to allow the drawback upon the imported ra,o
material, and deny it upon the same article,
when manufactured in our own country. He
adve ted tOthe beneficial effects which had re-
sultel from the allowance of drawback upon o.
Their articles, and to the general advantages of
the draw back system, which had been adopted
as one of our principles of trade, from the very
origin of orr government.
| Mr.. Lowrc said, that he had found reason to
change some of the opinions which induced him
TO vote against this bill, at the last session. but
he still ENTERTAINED some doubts ON the subject,
and his vote would depend on the result of the
tariff bill before the other House. He should
be willing to vote for this BILL iii were SO moi-
fed as 20 include hemp of domestic grow tn.
He was not willing to do any thing to hurt the
growth of this article, in our country; as he
thought rs encouragement necessary to render
US really independent of foreign nations. If the
drawback, or bounty, were given on all cor
dage exported, without designation, it would
tend to enc 9urage the domestic growth ofhemp.
1t the encouragement proposed in the bill now
before the other House, were extended, he be.
lieyed 1t would not be necessary to make such
| provision III this bill, as that to which he had
alluded. This he considered n very important
BILL 1.-THE drawback were allowed on this ar
tcle, he did not see why it should not also be al
lowed ON iron, glass, and other articles. He
was willing, however, TO adopt the measure, in
relation to cordage, provided the objection he
had stated, could be removed. He was in ia
vor Of postponement.
| MIR. D'Wo again rose in support of the bill;
briefly recapituiating, and referring to the rea-
sons he had urged in favor Of il, on its former
| discussion.
I Mr.. Talbot spoke of the advantages possess
ed by the Western States for the growth of hemp
The believed that, with 4 reasonable degree of
/ encouragement, six of the Western States
would, in short time, produce a sufficient
quantity. He avowed his perfect readiness to
vote for this bill, fits friends were wingto ex-
tend its advantages as well to the domestic as to
the foreign article; and intirnated his willingness
that the bill should be amended, by striking
out from it the word '.toreign," and thereby do
I away the distinction objected to.
Mr.. Eaton hoped that the gentleman would
not withdraw his motion for postponement; and
stated some reasons which induced him to wish
that the bill might be postponed for the present.
To this Mr.. Talbot assented; and
The bill was postponed to, and made the or
der of the day for Monday next.
The bill '''to enable the President to carry
into effect the Treaty of Client, the cath Dec.
1914, excluding foreigners from trade and in
tercourse with the Indian tribes within the Uni
;, ted States and to preserve the fur trade within
the limits of the said United States to American
citizens" was again taken up for consideration;
| MIR. Knight was called to the Chair. The ques-
ton was, upon al amendment offered by Mr..
Barton, proposing new section as substitute
for the third section of the bill.
The proposed amendment provides that the
Office OF Superintendent of Indian Affairs, at St.
Louis, and the present Indian Agency, on the
waters of the Upper NJ ssouri shall be abolished;
and authorizes the Pr .sident to appoint Indian
Agents, to be stationed among the Indian tribes,
On the waters ofthe Upper Missouri. 1t makes
1t the duty OF the Superintendent and Agents
OF Indian Affairs TO prevent all citizens of the
United States from hunting and trapping, ON a.
i NY ihcdh iaf'us, ana 10 ENFORCE The laws against
all such persons as shall be guilty of those Of
iences-ior which purpose, these Supcrintcn-
dents and Agents are to he authorized 10 call
upon the nearest military posts of the bnited
States for aid.
MIR. Barton explained the objects Of the a.
nendment he had proposed. Mr.. Benton OPP
posed, at considerable length, the first part of
the amendment, providing for the abolition OF
the Offices therein specificd but was willing to
adopt the latter part of it, and thus re-cnact the
provisions of an act for 1902.