The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-08-08

The House being in Committee Of the Whole on
the amendments of the Senate to the Naval Appro-
priation bill
Mr.. CUSHING said that the gentleman from Ten
nessee (Nlr. Johnson) had complained OF others ior
dverging from the question, and yet, when profess
ing to advance arguments against the Senate amend
ments, had not mentioned one which had the ieas'
bearing upon the subject. -.
He had asserted that the appropriations oil inns 3
year exceeded those of the last by two-ahd-a-hai
millions. He demanded the proof
Mr. JOHNSON denied that he had said So and pro-
ceeded TO explain.
Mr.. CusnIsc supposed the gentleman had not
meant what he said but such had been ms language
MIR. G. presumed he meant to say that the estimates
Of the Secretary had exceeded the appropriations OIL
the last year by the amount he mentioned.
Ii the fact so, il argument on the ques-
ton of concurring in the Senates amendments
The real question was, and the only question, whe-
Their il was proper or not to add $500 900 to the
amount in the House appropriation bill. On that
question the Gentleman had not thrown one particle
of light; he Had not touched it, nor approached II In
any way. The true inquiry was, what would DC the
Indebtedness Of the Navy at the end OF the year
If that were $500 900 more than the House bill APP
propriaed, then the Senates amendment ought to be
concurred in. The general principle was, that the
appropriations in each year should meet the ooliga-
tons of that year. Now, he believed that the
amount proposed by the Senate near to the sum
which would be actually needed to discharge the debt
OF the Navy, and at any rate did not exceed IT, but
was, in fact, less.
The gentleman, instead of showing by figures that
this not the case had inyeighed against an al
legged increase of the personal military strength OF the
Navy. He had asserted that the Secretary had add
ed to the Navy 5000 officers and men. lie demand
cd to know whai Secretary had done this Let the
gentleman show it, if he could. Mr. o. denied the
fact What Secretary had made such an addition :
Had Secretary Badger' Had Secretary upshur :
He challenged the gentleman to show it. 1t was on
such mere loose assertions that the gentleman invited
the House to reject the Senales amendment to the
bill
Some explanations here passed between Mr.
CUSHING and Mr.. MCKAY, referring to a former part
of the debate.
1t was true that in the lapse of years. this addition
had gradually been made not, however, by any one
Secretary, but by Congress- under the established po
hey Of the Government for the gradual increase OF the
Navy. But what had that fact to do with the issue
now pending The only practical question was,
what would be the debt of the Navy IN December
1872 The increase II too great and too rapid might
be a good argument why Congress should pass laws
to limit and regulate peace establishments but sure
ly il arguuen for refusing to pay the debts OF
the Government; it furnished no valid excuse for re-
jeclng the honest claims of men who had labored for
their money and were justly entitled to IT,
Mr.. G. could not but be struck with the fact that,
while the gentleman from Tennessee was laying this
augmentation OF the personal force of the Navy as an
accusation the door of the existing Administration,
1t had by his own admission, been growing as We'll
under former Administrations under this, and was
nothing than the result of that cardinal policy
of this Government the gradual increase Of its naval
power
Was that policy wrong2 Did the gentleman main
tam it to be wrong2 And if it were, who re-
sponsibe for it Really from the tenor of the gen
lemans own language, one would have supposed that
Martin Van Buren, or Andrew Jackson had been the
American Government. He had talked about their
expanding and SO much for the Navy. Who were
they? Was il they who appropriated the money OF
the people and applied according to their pleasure
No; il was Congress who had made the appropria-
tons, and it did not become the gentleman To speak
though it were the work of any Department.
What would the gentleman have' Were we to re-
strain the Navy Department from employing the Ma
Wy of the country Were ships of war to be dis
mantlcd Were they to be laid up to rot sin ordi
nary2" He never would agree any such system.
II the policy ofthe Government, for the last twenty
years, was mistaken or false policy let the House
say SO, in the proper time and form. That was not
now the question. The question now was on paying
just debts
MIR. c. now referred to some.of the remarks of the
gentleman from Georgia. Mr. MerweherD who had
uate that the Secretary made esasve and UNI
fair demand upon he House for the pay OF the home
squadron and had, by implication, imputed to MI
c. himself the concealment of facts with view TO de-
cevc the House. The real fact had simply been hat
the appropriation asked for by he Secretary was based
estimate that Tapped over and extended beyond
the limits of fiscal year That fact, SO far from be-
floor; in confirmation (which position Mr. G quoted
tn pI nted report OF speech OF his made at the time
Another thing imputed by the gentleman from
Georgia upon the Secretary, had been the sending OF
double estimates for the pay of of the ships
as when vessel estimated for a receiving ship af-
forwards went abroad. But this, instead of involving
double estimates, and an attempt to deceive, was a
common everyday occurrence. The Columbus, for
example, had been estimated for as a receiving ship,
but when the Ohio came into port the Columbus sail
I'd nd he place.
happened in regard to the frigate Columbia. 1t was
mere arrangement or exchange OF ships.
There was other most extraordinary argu-
ment against concurrence in this amendment which
had been urged by the gentleman from Tennessee
it was an appeal to the blind esprit de corps of the
House to its pride as a House: and the gentleman
had avowed the revolving determination that rather
than yield to the Senate by amending the bill, he
ready to sacrifice the Navy Of his country. This
was an appeal to mems passions and it was brought
as a financial argument against providing for bal
ance of $500, 900 which would be due and must be
paid
The gentleman said it was a question of power. A
question of power Why what question could there
be in the case? Had not the Senate po,cer to amend
bill from this House
Mr.. JOHNSON explained He had referred to APP
pointments made without law.
Mr.. c. said he had not reached the subject of APP
pontments yet and it was a different question, moi
involved in the amendment. The gentleman's appea
had been naked appeal to the passions of the House
and TO crafty pride he called them to sacrifice the
Navy, and declared himself ready for such an alter
alive.
Mr.. c. considered it as great misfortune of the
present period that the several departments of the
Government seemed to be Il ying questions of power
between themselves, and those too, of the most re-
condite and delicate description 1t obviou:
that if we would carry complex system like
ours, there must be discretionary forbearance
among its departments towards each other. With
this the Government could not lonr continue tf
exist. Had we not quite trouble enough with the
questions of power between Congress and the Execu
tive without starting new questions between the two
Houses of Congress? What right had gentlemen or
that floor to debate speeches made in the Senate
Chamber and to comment on them,
Is is said the Senate has done the same thing