Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1842-07-16
REM ARkS OF MR.. W Ii E,
OF INDIA n \,

On the bill to crtead for limited feriod,he pre-
sent iarrs for laying and collecting tAties on
imports
The bill $40 extend Tor limied period the
present laws for laying and coH~'ing dntioa on
imports, being under considerahn. and the pen
ding question being the motIomi Mr.. Rooseve 1t
TO strike out the provrso therein
Mr.. WnIie, OF Indiana, spoke early AS follows
Mr.. Chairman, promise, IN Svance, not only
TO res,rlc, myself within tneltntts OF the one
hour rule, bur, If possible 10 do nstice TO the top
les propose to discuss, not tteccupy over one
half that time. This House vii bear me wit.
ness that | am as lItt!e ohnoxi.s to the charge
of unnecessarily consuming ttre 10 debate as
any member upon the floor. Nr should | now
ask its indulgence to submit az considerations
Of mine upon this bull were 1t Di Tor some re-
marks which were made by colleague tAir.
Prpf1 two DAYS since, lille dIscssiug ITS merits.
Sir, | am in favor Of this hi IL stands
Niihou, the proviso which declaes that the dis
lrlbntlon Of the proceeds of the pbIc lands shall
not be suspended, i: can find no ivof with me-
If this provso be stricken out, NOV ed by the
ge ntleman from New York. (Mr. Roseveit) !
will say TO gentlemen, not only for self, but
for most Of the members from 'beyod the noun
tains,7 that the bill as it will then stnd will find
Ilttle or support from that quater
NV colleague has asserted that In incorpora
ton Of This prGvso the bill is vilaiIon Of the
'comprorntse act" The gentleman rom Virgin
ia, (Mr Jones.) who has just taken lis seat, no,
only reiieraies the sentiment. but eclares that
the "compromise act is altogethe opposed to
he policy Of distribution, md lookst TO the land
fund as national rercnue. Sir, tae the issue
which these gentlemen make. andl tender to
them and TO every member OF his cmmittee an
other; and that is, that the ''compomIse ACT
contemplates the distribution of ,heproceeds OF
the public lands among the States, nd the sup
por, Of the Government by revaue derived
from imports alone. This point propose now
briefly to discuss, and invite the and,d atten-
ton my colleague and the gentIetau from VIZ
gina to the argument.
What are the terms Of this compromise -
lie, M direct the attention Of the committee TO
The third section of the act, and ak for 1t a TAI
leral construction II declares tina ''such duties
shall be laid for the purpose of raiing such rer-
enue as may be necessary to an ecopmchi admin
istration of The Government" What is here
provided? Does the act declare tht such duties
sha II be laid for purpose Of raising 81 revenue As
may. together NTH the proceeds Of the public
lands be necessary TO an economical admInis
trstIon Of the Government? Nd AT all. IT
looks TO imports, and TO imports done. IL pro-
vides not only tina, duties shall be lid bu, the "a
mount of those duties and the purpose for whic b
ihev shall be laid The amount Is all which the
Government NAV require hen economically nd
m tered. and the purpose is re1enne Lam
guage cannot be more plain, and words could not
have been employed by the parties to thus COM
promise which would more inteiigiby convey
their meaning. IT this be not the rue and only
Of the terms of this section. Will
gentlemen tell what other construction those
terms will bear? But, If the intention OF the par
lies IN the "compromise" is not sufficiently OBJ
vious from the phEaseology of the act, appeal
to a circumstance which ai'ended--peThaps
should say preceded-the passage OF the com
promise bill" 20 establish he position which
have assumed. and 10 justify nv construction O.
the third section. To gather tbs meaning and
spirit of law, am no, required By any rule o.