The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-06-13

the w est. According 10 MS own argument there
was equal reason for him to move TO put down ali
the navy-yards throughout the country.
Mr. s. replied to the argument Of Mr. HEnEy
that the letting out this work at contract would en-
able the mechanics of the country 10 come in on
fair competition TO receive the contracts. He de-
MED that this would DC the result and argu ed that
they would be likely to fall into the hands of some
millionaire some powerful company, who would
employ the practical mechanics at fixed rate and
would themselves reap all the proht OF the con.
tracts It would be no better for them then as far
as labor was concerned and TO materials there
was the same demand for them, whether built un
der private contract or at the government yards.
Mr. s. further enforced the claims of the West
and of Memphis for a nsyy-yard, and urged the
advantages that would result theretrom IN the en-.
lioyment by the government OF the variety, album
dance, and cheapness Of materials which the West
can furnish, and in the increased friendship and con-
hdence in the navy which would be the result Of
bringing in contact with the western section ofIhe
country.
| In the course of his remarks he yielded for ex-
PLANTATION, or inquiry, TO Messrs. HENLEY and
| ASHMUN.
| Mr.. MCKAY, in reply to Mr.. STAUSroS, said he
had submitted no motion IN relation TO the navy
| yard at Memphis but II true he had said 10
that gentleman that he would move TO reduce the
appropriation from 100000 to $50 000 and he gave
HIM the reason for II that very large balance for
this work remained unexpended in the treasury Of
|
appropriation Of s50,OOO, making something like
$500 900, would certainly be sufficient TO carry thus
work through the next fiscal year. 1t was very
| large amount Had he been aware that it was so
great he should not have reported an appropriation
for this yard at all. This motion he should make
IN no hostility TO the yard at Memphis. Ii was
true, when the law passed authorizing the CON-
mencement of the work, he thought It was nexpe-
dienU he thought g. still.
| In regard 10 the pending amendments for dry
dock at Philadelphia, at Kttery, Maine, and PEN
sacoa-and the gentleman from South Carolina also
insisted dry dock al Charleston, South Carolina
where there was navy-yard at al-nothng but a
civil staton-and hardly that, Ia laugh) and he was
followed by the gentleman from Georgia, who asked
for an appropriation Gall very modest in their de-
mands) of 100000 to commence a dry.dock at
Savannah Georgia. In regard to these propositions
he doubted whether they properly come in at all
on this bill He regretted that they had been sub
milted OF the seven navy-yards Of the Unhed
States, only two had docks-one at Gosport Vits
GINA, the other at Charestown, Massachusetts: and
these, together with that which was in progress at
Brooklyn, New York, had been authorized not in
this irregular way in appropriation bill, but by
special laws, (Mr MckAY read one Of the laws.)
And there were now on the calendar two bills prov-
ding for some Of these yards-one reported from the
Committee on Naval Affairs and the other from the
Committee on Commerce. And the gentleman from
| Pennsylvania Mr.. LEus) was the mover of this
proportion for Philadelphia himself, member Of
the latter committee, had reported from that com.
mttee, bill for dry-dock at Philade pha. Why
not them let these things take their regular course!
Why waste the time Of the committee by ntrodu-
cling these amendments, appropriately to these
bills'
But was the committee aware of the fact that these
amendments Of 5000, 900 proposed for Philadelphia
and of $50 900 for Pensacola, if adopted, were but
the beginning Of expenditures Did the gentleman
suppose that these appropriations would build them?
Why the dock at Portsmouth cost from seven hun
dred thousand 10 a million dollars, and that at
Charestown cost about $500 000 If we were to 90
on with this extrayagant systemic build a dock
at Kittery, Maine, at Savannah, and at the other
points indicated, it would involve an expenditure of
millions Of dollars.
Some conversation occurred between Mr. LEVIN
and Mr.. Mckay.
Mr.. MCKAY further urged the improprietv of
proposing these appropriations to an ordinary ap.
preparation bill, which provides for the pay Of the
navy for procuring provisions, &c. for it, and fol-
all other naval purposes authorized by existing
laws. 1t also made for several navy-yards slouS
the sea-coas He thought 1t worthy of the grayl con-
sideration of the House, and the country, whether
some ofthese yards ought not TO be discontinued He
would not go into this subject, which he was aware
would open wide discussion; but he wished to call
attention to high authority. In 1929 this whole
subject OF navy-yards was under consideration and
Gen. Jackson communicated his views 10 Congress-
: Mr. Nick. read Gen. Jackson's views and also
; those embodied in the same document, of board
consisting of some Of our most distinguished naval
t officers, who were decidedly of opinion that the
present number OF navy-yards was greater than was
consistent either with economy, was required by
f the wants Of the servce] To show how these wards
are managed, and how productive they are of enor-
nous expense, he referred to the Presidents mes
: sage and accompanying documents at the CON-
mencement of this session, showing that cost the
government for the pay of superintendents and of
| n tha 81.
per year, while the amount Of labor performed in
all the yards for the same time was but $4,000
He also referred to British authority, on the same
subject, showinga state of things not as bad as It
t was in this counry-that in the navy-yards of
Great Britain for every 93! paid to men for labor
n 81 was paid to superintendent officers &c; and
showing also that the cost of building vessels at the
public yards and at private yards was about five to
Il one.
: In conclusion, he expressed the hope that the
+ committee would reject all these amendments and
that these yards would not be enlarged unless il was
r absolutely necessary. Some of the appropriations
already proposed in this bill he thought were larger
o than they should be.
i Mr.. WINTHROP alluded to the decision of the
chair, justlfying the wide rnnge of debate which
r had been taken, and remarked that he would like,
did time permit, to discuss several subiects-the
tariff, the Mexican war; of the origin and pro-
n gress of which he wished to say something here
AFTER also the bill to provide pension for the widow
of Capt. Robert Gray, the discoverer of the mouth
o of the Columbia river; He thought, when we were
r about reaPing the advantage of this discovery
when we were at last about to enjoy peaceably that
territory first discovered by his enterprise and that
of his hardy crew, he thought it would be hard if
this Congress adjourned without making provision
for the support ofhis venerable widow.
n In regard to a provision of the BILL he thought
great injustice would be done by it to gallant Off.
Ger in the servicei and he should move, when In
8 order, to strike out the followingl
prOcdsd That no payment shall hereafter be made the
colonel other officer of said corps uhe
by virtue OF commission Of brgsdie general by srevet
: 1t was well known, he said, that General Hender-
son was the officer aimed at; and Mr.. W., at some
length, opposed this attempt the part of the ma
E jorlty of the Committee Of Ways and Means, who
, had no authority to turn him QUITO accom- sh, In
fact, the thing, by Withholding his lawful salary
from man who had had the commission of briga-
der general by brevet conferred upon him by Gene
raj Jackson and CHE not being acted upon by
~ ,,ha a., N 7