The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-06-02

lar amendment was proposed before, gave il as my
oplnien that II was the commencement OF new princ-
Pile. am OF those who deslre in my legislative ac-
on to avoid making contracts the part ot the gen
eral governments for know that, whenever the gov.
The losses - ;nyasiabJv fail upon Il What are we propo
sing 10 do now To give ourselves the character OF
lessor with view to lease the public property TO indi
viduals and thereby 10 the extent OF the contract which
we make with the lessee transferring the public property
TO the control OF that lessee subject to the contract
And II The contract turns out TO be dsadvantageous or In
furious TO the lessee any losses that will be sustained,
venture to say will be saddled upon the government
and for this purpose public property is TO be con
,roiea oy havlauas Now hls Is said 20 o. iof ,hs nc
merchant marine Who 10 be the owners the
controlYs, and the essees OF this propertys indi-
| Mr. WELLER Will the senator from Georgia allow
me to read the amendment He certainly msaFprehends
it's whole character does not propose to lease the dry
Mr. DAWSON Wha, does il propose
MIR. WELLER. Itprovsions are:
"That said dock may be used for the purpose Of repaif
In such manner, for such compensation. and npon suoh
and conditions, shall be prescribed by The Secre
ary Of the Navy"
Mr. DAWSON. Undenaby. all that is true.
Mr.. WE'LL Err And do you call that leasing it out
Mr.. DAWSON. Certainly; il is leasing il out, be-
this + to Ss d G Nsyy
may choose the individual who enters into the contract
will have rights given to him by it, and will have the
possession and control of thu property do not desire
10 oppose this finally All that desire is that should
take time The dock is not yet there; il has yet TO be
completed Let the Secretary OF the Navy inquire into
the state and condition OF things there and present to
Congress scheme accompanied by facts, that may
comprehend the condition OF things there and then we
can pass a law to meet whatever emergency may arise.
But now, before the dock Is erected, are we to authorize
the Secretary OF the Navy to put at the command OF ia-
divduas who may desire to use il for their vessels lhe
great injury which is to result from rs this: The use OF
this public dock for private purposes will prevent the
erection OF private DOCKS and the lessee or the CONTRACTS
or, who will have possession OF the pablo docks, will
demand OF those who desire improvements and repairs
upon their vessels just what he peases II destroys all
competition, and il will grow into this result that the
government will be the builder Of all the docks for public
and private purposes hereafter And soon as this dock
shall be placed without the control OF the government IN
this way the dock al Kttey, the one at Philadelphia.
and the one At Pensacola Will all follow N ,ne same
repairers-and get possession OF the government prop
erly
fprefer that this proposition should be Withdrawn, for
concur most thoroughly with the honorable senator
from New Jersey, whose experience and observation
should have great influence on this subject Let passed
over at least for the present. and let be brought up
when the general naval appropriation bill shall be before
us--when shall have time to consider and go hear
something upon the subject. This is what desire.
Upon great principle, which controls me- that this
government should enter into no such contract want to
the time when the government shall pay down the
dollars whenever II purchases anything | want the
government to make none OF your running contracts
OF those arrangements in relation to the public
property.
whole argument amounts to this whether this govern
meat will act the part OF the dog the manger in this
dock business The whole amount OF the amendment is
that while do not want 10 use this dock. we Will
allow our merchants 10 il. And the only question
whether that shall be at the discretion OF the on
in control OF the station, subject TO his whm and ca
price, whether it shall be under set oil regulations
prescribed by the Secretary OF the Navy in pursuance OF
law That is the whole dispute. II seems 10 me that
so plain question cannot need much elaboration before
Mr.. STOCKTON Mr. President this is to my
mind not quite 80 small matter as some senators sup
pose think there is great principle which will grow
out Of and be established by it, Senators say that they
want TO do now by law what they have been doing
without law. They must admit hen that the officers IN
the public service OF the United States, who have COM
mand OF the public ships and dock yards, will hereafter
be prohibited from rendering aid 10 the mercantile ma
rne TO vessels in distress, because they see here that
they must have law TO do IL Now, II you must have
law 10 enable them TO permit merchant weasel IN San
Francisco 10 go into public dock, you must have law
authorizing vessel TO give barrel OF flour or OF pork
vessel 10 distress. say the principle Is estabshed-
has been practsed since the foundation OF the govern
ment-that wherever public ofilcer meets private c
Distress he authorized to give TO that private in
dvidual all the aid he give, simply requiring OF him
remuneration for the actual expenses be has been put 10
and that TO call upon him to pay more was never intend
ed, my judgment, the purpose OF this government
II through the agency of public officer, Of the pub
lie works. you should benefit citizen. you should do
iionly requiring him to pay the actual expenses incur
red by confeung this benefit You should not degrade
this government by requiring your officers TO call upon
citizens to pay for any service that you happen 10 render
TO unfortunate man
u
upon this subject, il should be done with caution.
As my honorable friend from Georgia Mr. DAwsoE]
says, you undertaking TO throw your legislation over
wide held and you must take time TO do it. there
FORE you do anything, do hope this matter will be post
poned until the Senate shall have opportunity 10 look
into the matter But repeat that in my judgment no
| legislation is necessary.
have one word to say TO my friend from California,
| [Mr WELLrR,1 who, with an air OF triumph that does
not TO to be al all justified by the Argument be
seemed to think that he not only accused me but
convicted me OF great inconsistency Said be, !" You
went for the Collins line and you will not go for
this" absained from participating in the debate upon
this ndmen when before the Senate, not that
had no views that wanted TO express, but because
hoped that every speech | heard would be the Las
could not conceive how simple proposition TO pay
mail carrier an additional price could have given rise 10
such an excited and extended debate and IL the gentle
IRON California together with others, who made the
onslaught upon that proposition submitted by the Naval
Committee, chose to 20 into the great question OF gov
eminent, which had nothing do with il, is his own
mitee was treated with the respect and confidence
which in my udgmentii deserved That committee were
edpay, the duties imposed upon them by the Sen
ate did require that they should undertake examine
into The authority under which these made
They not required TO go and ask how much money
the steamers OF the Cunard line cost They were not
called upon TO inquire whether the government made
money or lost money by the postage; The matter refer
red to that committee was simply this Wil you give
few thousand dollars mail carrier, or VIII you
allow your mails TO be stopped That was TIE question
properly before The Senate, and the only question: eena
tors will permit me 10 say with due respect to them,
that ought 10 have been debated here. And now would
like to know taking that view OF the subject how the
gentleman from California here and hold me