The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-04-01

or according the capdity of foreign government
know that this granting Of an Increased compensation to
these vessels has been fruitful theme for stump speech
all the United States. but the system has made
advertisement throughout every that the Americans
are the best builders in the world and have dslaneed
her rivals More than that II has given you twenty
eight thirty steamships fl for war purposes without
additional expense 10 your navy, for oneenth OF the
sum Tor which you could build aud maintain them in
your navy proper. We owe II TO American industry and
enterprise; il 10 the hardy citizens of
tIy, TO maintain the system; and we owe it 10 our
uonai dsienees. 10 my opinion, to maintain IT,
Mr.. HUNTER | said, and suppose one will dis
pute IT, that II these ships be considered spec
uaon Tor postal purposes, they had turned out TO be
farce. We pay upon this Bremen route. how much One
hundred thousand dollars shp-that is. S1oo,ooo a
and what do you suppose receive IN The shape
OF hostages IN return Why, sir, Tor the year ending
last December the whole amount was Ss5.Ooo-ess than
what we pay for one ship. But upon what ground ls II
that the senator from Texas rests his argumsnts Why
he says that IL dlmnlshes the cost OF freight and thus
increases tradetha is, the United States will build
ships, will pay to ships it will diminish freight
OF course il will In that way we could bnng freight
down TO nothing II the United States would build
ships and transport freight for nothing freight would be
reduced 10 nothing But what IL that the senator
sad' understood him TO say that this system had re-
duced freight by hundred millions.
MIR RUSK. said that living charge for freight upon
the shipping OF The United States amounted to hundred
Mr.. HUNTER. That is the charge for the freight Of
the shipping of The United States Wha, has that TO do
with the question The whole amount OF freight in the
United Staes-how is that dependent upon connexion
with this Bremen line apprehend that it would be
much more profitable for those private individuals who
carry the business OF trading tor their own purposes
II the United States did not interfere.
Mr.. RUSk. As matter OF course, the tax upon the
| coton-grower will benefit them
| Mr.. HUNTER. And OF course, il the United States
would undertake 10 transport cotton freight for nothing
The cotton planter would have pay less for freight But
apprehend there is nobody in The whole range OF the
southern country who would propose TO transport cotton
| in the ships OF the United States tor nothing.
Mr.. RUsk No, sir; nobody proposes that
Mr.. HUNTER. Then do not understand the argu-
ment Of the senator, unless be held that because
contribute TO the steamers out Of the treasury OF the
United States they enabled TO transport commodities
at less charge Unless that be his argument, do not
OF the government TO interfere in the trading bust
ness this matter OF ocean could be INDICATED
at ALL il is upon the ground, that hereafter il is to become
profitable, and remuneate us IN the shape OF hostages.
Have we not tried il long enough to know that there is
no chance for ihal ask if the senator from Texas
does no, himself know that the owners of this Havre
and Bremen line admit that expect 10 be-
repaid by POSTAGE am willing to let them off their
contract, provided we can get rid of policy which
think mischevous. am willing to deal Literally with
the Individuals if we can do that II can secure the
triumph OF good principle either in policy or in morals,
am willing TO pay for IT, and even lose something but
will forever oppose any attempt 10 extend the appro-
pration for the purpose OF running steamships q. The
expense OF the United States.
Now, in regard TO the Collins line, it not predicted
al the time had The contest In relation 10 that that
the hostages were 10 increase immensely, and that
should be repaid by the hostages which that line to
bring lns w Udt mas Oeen our experience! During the
last year, ending December, has anything been gained
worth speaking Off Here is the report The receipts do
not amount in the whole year 10 S25o,oO0, and are
giving them between eight and nine hundred thousand
dollars year When, then, is the gentemans argument
reduced toi mere matter OF national pride. Now,
sir ask how can minister to the renown, the reputa
ton, or the glory OF our naton 10 keep up, at the
pense of the United States treasury such steamers such
enterprises cannot support themselves! Sir if we
could open new line OF legitimate business, which
would spring up and support itself upon the legitimate
profits OF industry if it could be self supporting and self
sustaining | acknowledge that il would eminently re-
dound to ou national honor and reputation but as to
this poor ckey enterprise that requires the constant
nursing of the senator from Texas and the Post Office
Committee from year TO year-they constantly grow
ing and more rapacious, and he IS constantly beg
ging US 10 give them more--l ask how we can take
either pride pleasure in contemplating such policy
hope shall put end to it at once and now we
have afforded an opportunity IN which believe we
do it, and do IT, believe, 10 the benefit OF the
tractors themselves. I
Mr. ADAMS As | understand il, the claim set up by
the senator from Texas is that the contract entered into
by thus company does not pay them aproh; or, in other
words, that they are losing money The main argument
which he offers is that the Collins line, account OF
their losing money by their conae received al the hands
OF Congress additional With all due respect
my friend IRON Texas, do not think it COMFORTS very
well with him 10 give that as precedent here By his
influence in this body the speeches which he made upon
this subject and his position upon the Post Office Com
mee, he more than any other one man, contributed 10
bring about the passage OF that law Therefore, when
he passes law to enable men 10 make money, when
they have made contract, and then brings forward that
very law 10 lead us TO give another appropriation TO
other line, he first makes the precedent, and then calls
upon To follow ii.
take it for granted that these gentlemen capable
of making contract II will be recoliecied that but
few days ago my friend from Iowa presented the claim oil
survey ors who had made con,rac, with the gov
ernment, add bad lost money by i-a of only about
81 200. That was rejected They were supposed 10 be
capable OF making contract Tor themselves and the
government held them responsible for it, But il seems
that this principle Is TO be departed from when the
amount goes up TO hundreds OF thousands ask The |
of the country in this The only given
why the amendment should pass, is that the line is los
ing money upon their contract Were they deceived /
wnen they made that contract Did the government
commit fraud upon them Were they not able to |
make contract, Are they not able comply with their
contract III they had by their contract made than
they expected, they would have thought of returning
anything TO the government, but if they lose, this gov
eminent must become insurance company 10 every
individual who has made contract and loses by IT, Sir
would better abandon these contracts than do that
When these parties make contracts with the government
there no good reason why they should not be held TO
the contract you have made with them.
But there Argument OF the senator from Texas
TO which my honorable friend from Virginia did not at
tempt 10 reply. II was avery grave srgument My friend
from Virginia overIooked it, The senator says that
less give this additional compensation TO the con-
tractors, the emigrants from foreign countries will have
to pay very high postage their love letters That
of the serious Arguments urged by the senator that
these emigrants, writing back 10 their relations and
friends, will have to pay too high rates their letters
There about much in that argument in the other
there is much 10 mold these men 10 their
contracts there is for holding in the case OF email
their contracts and again call the attention OF
the Senate to the from Iowa, precisely similar in
principle, in which we refused TO grant relief
! Mr. DAVIS. | have disposition beyond the