New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-03-20
NEW ORLEANS WEDNESDAY, MARCH TO- 1872.

a mint at New Orleans and keep it up with
the expenses attendant upon 1T. AS
money saving operation it would be great
deal better that we should do 1T. ~
One word more. THE Senator talks ABOUT
81 .OOO, 900 being involved. Whose property
was this 1t was the property of the city
of New Orleans. The government or the
United States never had anything but the
usufruct in it. 1t never had any Tee IN TIE
property. 1t never had any more than
possessOry right to possess that property so
long as it should use it in particular WaE
The government never gave dollar lot TIE
property. Now what is it the government
will give up if it ceases to use the property
according to the terms of the grant A few
old buildings.
Mr.. kellOgg-Only one.
Mr.. Thurman-One old building. | did
not know looking lat the expense that Il
saw had been incurred in regard to that
mint, but that it might be very valuable
building l learn that it is not so. As to
the personal property, the government
keeps that as matter of course; and as to
the value of this Old building, probably it
will not more than pay for the use OF the
property since the government has ceased
to use it as mint.
Nh Morrill,, of Vermont. know that
Mr.. Knox is very learned on the subject OF
mints and coinage, but would not take his
needed a mint at New Orleans any quicker
than l would the opinion of the Senator
from Ohio. That Senator is as capable OF
Judging whether we need mint at New Or-
leans as Mr.. Knox.
have no doubt at all, from what have
discovered, that if we abolish this mint now
and surrender it. the Senators from Louisl-
ana will be here within the next six years
asking for new appropriation to buy site
4 fnps np fhprp
The Senator talks about this mint build
ing being Of little or no value. Why, sir 1t
cost nearly six hundred thousand dollars,
and the supervising architect reports that 1t
is in good repair, and for $4,000 he could
put it in operating, working shape:
Mr.. Thurman-I will ask the Senator i
that does not include all the machinery and
fixtures
Mr.. Morrill, of Nermont-Thera is another
point in the case We originally appro-
| priated $500 900 for the site. | do not know
| what has become OF that money. haze
tried to find ont. but have been unable to
ascertain. 1t does not appear in the docu-
| mrpt by which it was leased to us that we
paid anything for it, and yet previous to
that time s2co,oGo was appropriated for the
| site.
[ think this is a question of sufficient
| mapnituGe to be considered in bill by
| itself. IL relation to our rights there, we
have a right to choose cur own time
| when we will determine the question
whether We will keep it or not, OF
remove the buildings if we see tit.
There is no question about orr legal right
| to remove the building or sell the matert-
ais on the lot, and until this question Is
legislatively determined - determined by
Congress, it will not be determined at all
I move to lay the amendment on the table
Mr. Weston that motion ask TOR tie
yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered, and be-
in taken. resulted-yeas %, nays "a, as toi
| lows:
Yeas-Messrs. Anthony. Brownlow. Buck
ingham Cameron. Carpenter, Cole, Ed
mun,ls. Ferry. OF Connecticut, Frehnghuy
sen. Gilbert Hamilton, of Maryland, Hamil
ton. of Texas. Harlan, Morrill,, OF Maine
Morrill, of Vermont. Morton, Pratt, Schurz
Sherman, Srrague. Upton, Trumbnll
Nickers. Window, Wright-25.
Nays-Messrs. Ames. Bayard, Boreman
Chandler. Clayton. Corbett. Ferry, OF
Michigan, Flanagan. Hill. Hitchcock, kel
!o.g. Lewis, Logan. Norwood, Nye. Pool
Ramsey. Rice. Sawyer, Spencer, Stevenson
Stockton Thurman and West-24.
Abseut-Messrs. Alcorn, Blair, Caldwell
Casserlv. Conkling. Cooper. CraSin. DAVIS
of kentucky. Davis. Of West Virginia
Fenton. Goldthwaite, Hamlin, Howe, John
ston. Kelley, Osborn, Patterson, Pomeroy
Robertson. Salisbury, Scott, Stewart, Sum
ner and Wilson-2:.
So the amendment was laid on the table