The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-04-27

Alter few more remarks from Mr. SAVAGE,
Mr. BAfLf addressed the House. arguing 10 show
glohcafon OF the gentlemen engaged ia it. and that con-
sequeny ON this account il was improper for the gov
MI b here related the history 81 the claims for COM
pensaon In the case 0 the person who brought Lafay
cite 10 this country and in that OF the claim for expenses
q tne Macedonian, on the occasion which that ship
had been loaned 10 citizens transport corn to the sh
to show that there would surely be an after-chaTge
against the treasury. this joint resolution was agreed
Tor the expenses o the voyage the value Of the ships.
damages. o. something OF the sort 81
Mr., BAKER at some length. defended the joint reso-
luton, on the ground that It search for phan-
thropists who had peed their lives Ia The arctic seas
for The benefit Of science ia which all men, Of ali civil
ized nations, were alik interested.
Mr WHITE moved the previous question on the Joint
motion to adjourn was then made; which was not
agreed TO,
The question the demand for the previous question
Mr.. PHELPS moved that the House 40 now adjourn
which motion was not agreed to-
Mr. CABLE moved = csll 0f shA Hbnss saaa 4 waA
The question recurring on seconding the demand for
the previous question: it was put, and quorum voted
motion 70 adjourn was made; which was not agreed
Mr. CABLE moved call Of the House; which mo-
ton NJ was Y, not net sgTeed 70; .
Ths SPEAKER remarked ,hat there : was % such rule,
and was understood to add that il was not common to
enforce it.
The question recurring on seconding the call for the
previous question, il was put, and il was seconded
The main question being ordered, and the first ques
Committee Of The Whole on tie state Of the Union the
yeas and nays thereupon were asked and ordered
Mr JONES moved to lay the joint resolution on the
ing next called the motion to refer the joint resolution
TO the Committee OF the Whole the state of the Union
was put; and was not agreed toyeas SO, nays 60
tleman from Missouri fMr HALL the ayes and noes noes
thersupon asked and ordered, and il agreed
to--ayes 124, noes Is.
The joint resolution was next ordered to be engrossed
and read third time The question being on its passage,
Mr. STANTON moved the previous question; which
oa On wsS he ysss sas
asked. and ordered and the said joint resolution was
then en- paMssed1ysss Mss N q. nays As
He had originally been in favor Of having the expedition
under the direction Of this government entirely. The
vote the proyiso had asonshed him. He considered
II to De the duty OF Congress to assume the whole
pense, ind to refund to Mr. Grinne the money he has
spent far the expedition. Mr. GrinDel (sad Mr..
McL( had no idea OF demanding any such indemnihca-
ton, but il due TO the character OF the government
that il should be refunded The navy had no vessels
suitable to the SERVICES and therefore i necessary
oyed IL Conclusion Mel moved o ay the @o
ton TO reconsider on the table; which having been
agreed TO-, S,.
In the hasty publication OF portion OF the congress
sona debates OF last Thursday several mistakes
red in the remarks Of General FoorE upon the subject Of
the printing for the Senate, which find il most conve
nen to correct by rpublishng the remarks themselves
Mr.. FOOTE | do not pretend to understand this
matter very thoroughly, being practical printer my
SELF and not having the Of ascertainng the facts
IN the case from the members OF the committee and
should very much distrust my own judgment to any
part Of the subject now under consideration; but t
strikes me that the amendment proposed is improper
one do not understand it, in the first place. TO be
hc elo..t
tanned here ascertaned In any mode equivalent to u
dical cerainytha this contract has been actually
lated in the manner that the amendment itself pesumes
that such violation OF II, or ncompliance with its
terms, has occurred In the absence OF the asceranmen
OF this fact in satisfactory mode, surely il be
obvious even 70 the honorable moysr himself that his
upon the assumption that violation OF the existing
tract has already occurred The language OF the amend
meni and thai proper steps De Immediately taken 70
ment Of the senator from Wisconsin
My second objection this Between private individu-
ais does not follow by any means that every violation
OF contract should litigation between the parties
to it, purchases estate OF B, at what turns out to
property or he may purchase the property at time when
the market price high, and, owing sudden reduction
in its value, he may afterwards find II impossible to
comply with the terms OF his purchaseat least with
out TO himself H. in such case. should be appealed
TO for orbearancs, take 1t for granted. il be be al all
liberal spirited person, magnanmous man, he would
would at least consent to such modification OF its terms
might. without fsta! injury TO HIMSELF relieve un-
fortunate man from contract thus oppressive and ruin
Gus. II this be proper and commsndable general
social principle, applicable 10 OF ordinary contract
between and man; ii he is properly regarded as
less illibera grinding oppressive, unkind, who
attempts 10 enforce legal remedy, in such
as have just described, ] ask IL the proposition
is not still clearer that government like ours, repre-
senting the blended majesty OF 2o,ooo0o0 Of free
men, is not entitled 10 recognise itself as bound by
any sense OF public duty in cases where contracts made
by its citizens with itself shall turn out not to have been
bad faith nor blameabe neglect OF any Sort enforce
rgidy and mercilessy the penalties consequent upon
such performance take il for granted that in all
such cases. there would be liberal regard paid to all the
exenuatng circumstances Of the case and If, owing to
mistake or error OF any kind, or owing TO serious
change OF circumstances any other fact facts that
would justify the supposition that the individuals thus
apparently in default had not been influenced by bad
iniquitous motives, but had, upon the whole, exeried
their best energies TO avoid with the strict
terms OF their contract would Il be maenanimous, proper
decent. righteous for the government rgdly 10
enforce the obligation Of such contract demand the
hard penalty Of the law, where the result of such a
course might be the entire ruin Of the individuals
sas, understand him, contends that il can never
be proper consistent with the national dignity to
apply the principle of Shylock, and exact the pound
of flesh from innocent persons who may have entered
into contracts with the government which they afterwards
find it utterly impossible TO fulfil
Il does not follow as matter OF course that admitting
ii to be true, which understand u the case, that
the violation the contract with the government is
an ascertaned fact. is the duty OF the government TO