Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1826-02-07

regular troops to guard your forts, in addition
to which YOU must draw out the requisite por-
ton of militia; and the calculations in the re-
port will show that the cost of these will be five
millions The cost on the other plan was Sc
yen,een millions, leaving a difference in six
months oftwelye millions, to build forts with,
so that the additional expense of single cam
paign's defence, will defray the cost OF the en-
tire line Of Notifications proposed by the Engl-
neers; and then it must be remembered that
YOUR forts, when once built, are permanent, but
YOUR army must be renewed--nor must 1t be
forgotten, that the disbursements for The erec-
ton of forts are made in a time Of peace, when
the country is prosperous and your treasury
comparatively full; but, armies, must, for the
most part, be raised in time OF war, when the
commerce of the country is deranged, and its
treasury drained, when every dollar that is eK-
pended is raised by loan. Can gentlemen for
get the loans of the late war? TO all this must
be added the fact, that this mode of defence
transfers the war from the land to the ocean
Though the enemy's fleets may be laundering
al your ports, the country in the interior is at
comparative II, pose; the war is scarcely felt at
the home of the husbandman; he neither sees a
foreign soldier nor is he oppressed by load OF
taxation from his own Government. Your
roads and canals proceed without interruption
and the labors of the plough and OF the loom
GO on as happily as if no war was raging
therefore take it for granted, MIR. Speaker,
that the House will not abandon this system
that it will not cast away all that is useful, all
that is great, all that is sublime in the national
policy-all that is calculated 10 give us safety
at home, and glory abroad You will not, with
sacreigious hand, PROSTATE and destroy all
that you ought 10 prize as citizens and cherish
as statesmen.
If, then, we are now in this system, and cam
not stop, the question recurs, at what rate shall!
we proceed? The Committee ask for $685.
900. Is it enough? is il too little? is 1t too
much? Sir, how Can we tell? We must go to
the estimates that have been furnished US; these
are the data and the only data trcm which we
can form 4 Judgment. If gentlemen can i'm.
peach these estimates, let them do so. But II
they cannot prove that these estimates are false
ly made, then we must receive them as our
guide, in making this appropriation. The Of
fcers OF Government tell u.s. that this sum will
be required to proceed with the works i'll the
best and most economical manner. Let US re-
member that il will complete these fortihca-
tons, and that it will put the system into en-
tire operation over one portion OF the country,
and fully cover it with the mantle Of protection
But if gentlemen are unwilling now to COM
mence the work at Bienvenue, they can reduce
the appropriation 10 100000.
A gentleman from nsylvania, whom have
now in my eye, Mr.. Buchanan,) says that you
must add an unexpended balance from the last
year, which will, in fact, make your this years
expenditure amount to a million Of dollars -
That gentleman is usually extremely accurate
IN fact, and sound in argument; but he appears
on this occasion, to have taken strange view
of this subject. ! remember that gentleman
in this House once favored US with an sxplana-
ton Of what was meant by unexpended balances
OF appropriations, from which he would have
US 10 understand that it means, in fact, sum
of money in tine Treasury which has never been
appropriated at all. But the gentleman from
Pennsyl ania has fallen into an error still great
er than that: for he makes balance Of appro-
priation for 1925, to mean the same thing as an
appropriation for 1926! This is the amount OF
his argument If it does not amount to this,
there is nothing in the argument. lie says
there is an unexpended balance OF 1925, and that
if we appropriate S795,0oo now, it will be in
fact, an appropriation Of one million OF dollars
for This year-but how can this be, unless the
balance Of an appropriation for 1925, is the same
thing as an appropriation for 1926? The gen.
tleman says there was balance unexpended.-
Yes, Sir, there was balance unexpended, but
does not the gentleman understand that, though
that balance might not actually have been paid
out in 1925, yet, that il was under contract and
engagement for works done in s25, and that 1t
cannot, by law, be applied to any other objects
than those belonging to the year 1925; and that
if il is not expended on those objects, 1t goes,
by law, 10 the surplus fund, and can by no pro-
cess be brought into the expenditures of 1926?
The Department made its contracts for the year
1925; the appropriation Of that year was made
to meet these contracts; it can go to nothing
else; and though at the end Of 1926 the con-
tractors might not have demanded and received
their money, yet, if the gentleman will inquire,
| will venture to ensure him that he will lind
all those moneys both demanded and paid in the
first quarter of 1926 But the gentleman asks,
are we to appropriate more for Forlihcatons
than for the Navy? Sir, the gentleman has look
ed only at the unexpended balance tor FortItl-
cations. 1.-THE gentleman had looked farther,
he would have found there was sill larger
unexpended balance Of the appropriation for
the Navy. He would have found also, that, in
stead Of 100000, more than a million OF dollars
was last year appropriated for the increase OF
the Navy, viz: 100000 for the regular annual