The daily union., 1846-06-30
TwENTY-NINTH CONGRESS,
First Session.
TUESDAY, June 80, ls46.
IN SENATE.

Mr.. RUSk presented the petition Of Captain Sam
uel Walker Of the Texas rangers, praying that his
company may be remunersted for loss of horses In
the war with Mexico; which was referred to the
Committee Of Claims.
GENERAL ORDERS OF THE DAY.
The Chair appointed the following senator's a COM
mittee under the resolution submitted yesterday by
Mr. BAGBT, in relation to providing a piece for
reporting the proceedings and debates Of the Senate
viz Messrs. BAGBY, J. M. CLAYTON, FAIRFIELD,
HoUsrON, and MoREHEAD.
PRIVATE.
The Senate considered the adverse report of the
Committee on Revolutionary Claims, on the petition
OF Thomas Bryant which concurred in.
Also, the adverse report Of the Committee on
Pensions, on the petition Of Cecilia Carroll; which
was concurred in.
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES.
Mr.. BAGBY, from the Committee on Indian
Affairs, reported back the bill for the relief Of John
Crowell with an amendment; which was read.
Mr.. ATHERTON, from the Committee on Print
ing, TO whom was referred the report Of Lieutenant
Aberts exploring expedition, with a view to inqui-
ring into the expense Of printing the Vme, and Ii
thograPhing maps and drawings attached thereto,
| submitted report upon the subject.
A message in writing received from the Pres
ldent OF the United States.
EXECUTIVE BUREAU.
Mr.. JARNAGIN, in pursuance of notice, asked
and obtained leave to introduce "a bill TO establish
and organize executive bureau under the excIu-
sIVe direction and control OF the President Of the
United States" which was read first and second
time, and ordered to be printed.
THE WAREHOUSE BILL.
On motion of Mr.. DIX, the Senate, as in commit
tee Of the whole, resumed the consideration of the
bill to amend act entitled "An act to provide rev.
enue from imports, and to change and modify exist
I'M m dutiea nm INN nd ntha
purposes"
| Mr.. HUNTINGTON addressed the Senate in
opposition to the bill. He agreed with the gentle.
man who reported the bill, Mr.. Dm,l that il was
| simple in It's details; but il involved principle of
| serious magnitude This was one Of a series of
measures intended to restore hard money currency,
| to reduce the tariff and TO play into the hands OF
| the foreign importer Ii had been acknowledged by
the chairman Of the Committee on Finance that the
passage Of this bill desirable in order to pre-.
pare the way for the introduction Of the sub-treasu-
ry system, and to obviate the evils which might
flow from the specie clause. In his (Mr. H
judgment it was miserable policy to adopt meas
in advance for the mitigation of evils which il
would be much safer and wiser to avoid altog ether
reduction Of the revenue received inevitably follow
the passage of this bill Mr.. Williams, surveyor OF
the port of Boston, had stated in letter to the Sec.
retary Of the Treasury that he believed the effect of
warehouse bill would be in the first year to reduce
the revenue twenty five per cent The testimony
of the collectors of New York and Boston, was of a
similar tenor In its present shape the bill was very
defective. IL was so manlfestly imperfect that il
could not command the votes of the Senate. He
would proceed to point out what he regarded as the
defects Of the bill. The postponement of the
| payment OF duties would enable the i'm
porter TO avail himself Of any change in the policy
| Of the government. BY means Of the means OF the
| telegraph he could enter his goods between the
passage Of bill and its receiving the signature OF
tha In thar l.. l..
materially injured. Besides the perishable nature
of many articles of commerce would be a source OF
loss to the government The conversion of the
public warehouse into mere retail shop would be
another effect Of the bill, as, although prohibited
from removing his packages the importer could take
out roll Of rlband, or any other item for the pur-
pose Of effecting sales. Bonds for the payment OF
duties should be required of the importer before ta-
King out the goods for home consumption No
such provision existed in the bill. Nor was there
any penalty prescribed for the clandestIne removal
of goods, or any kind offrauds which might be per-
pctrated. Mr. H. pointed out other particulars in
| which he deemed the bill defective; pnd then
| proceeded to an examination of its general
| principle, which he regarded as fraught with
mischief The warehouse system of Great
| Britain was not, in his judgment distinguished by
| that beraIity which had been ascrbed to il bv
the friends Of this bill Its establishment was prin-
cpally in reference to the South American trade.
| Brazil and other southern ports had no shipping
| when the system introduced, and it was i'm.
portant to obtain the products of those regions for
| the use of the British manufacturer. The commits
soners of the treasury then authorized to select
| the ports where the warehouses should be estab-
| llshed, as well as the kind of goods to be ware
| housed, and also the manner of their reception.
| The whole system was designed to advance ex.
| cusively British interests. Al the important arti-
ces OF commerce were warehoused for re-exporta-
ton in the the three great ports of London Liver.
RriatO Eas anHy I,l, II,
was excluded, well almost all articles which
| came in competition with the manufactures OF
Great Britain. No articles Of wool or cotton were
| TO be found on these warehouses, except some
goods from India. Such the operation of the
| tree-trade system of Great Britain. The French
| undertook the same policy. They also took care
of their own interests, avoiding the taxation of any
one interest," without providing for il an equivalent
In support Of this, he read from the debate in the
Chamber Of Deputies. He then proceeded to show
that this system not at all adapted for country
| without colonies. He would not say that warehouse
bill could not be passed which might benefit some
interests without in uring others. He was surprised
that the senator from New York should have desie.
mated this bill as an extension of the storage system
| established by the act of 1899, and which was in.
tended only to secure to the government the payment
Of the duties, by bonds as the act of IS42 provided
| for their payment in cash Under any circumsan-
ces, the goods to be sold after remaining
| in store nine months. The present bill was mere
experiment The present system worked admira-
| bly,. They should let well enough alone. The
| mercantile community had become accustomed to
the debenure system, and to repeal it would be un-
just and most hazardous He then described the
parties who would be benefited by the proposed
system-frst, the large capitalists, who could afford
to keep their goods in the warehouse; second, the
foreign merchants; third, the factors of the large
importers. He then read extracts from letters which
he had received from many merchants Of high intel.
Ilgence and great experience, in support of the
views which he had thus presented. He insisted at
length that the foreign merchant was the party
benefited by the introduction of the proposed system
The result would be to force the American importer
out of the market In l843 in New York, it was
| estimated that the imporations of British goods
we're by British subjects a. 65 per cent whilst OF
the same goods only 35 per cent were i'm ported by
Americans. No doubt, at present, the rate was as
IS per cent to 25 per cent. In the same year, the
importation of French goods was as 80 per cent. by
French subjects, and II per cent. by Americans.
From all other parts of Europe, 95 per cent of the
lmportatons were on foreign account. Such was
tbo III.