The Madisonian

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Wednesday, July 21, 1841.

Mr. WINTHROP, from the Committee on Commerce, made a report in favor of a revision of the tariff, accompanied by a resolution to appoint a committee of nine to sit in the recess and collect information, with a view to report a proper system of duties at the next session.

A debate arose upon the resolution.

Mr. WINTHROP explained the report, and the objects of it.

Mr. WISE moved to lay it on the table. He inveighed against any interference with the Compromise act. The resolution was the initiatory step to a protective tariff. He doubted the power of the House to constitute a committee to sit during the recess.

Mr. INGERSOLL supported the resolution, and maintained the power to create such a committee.

Mr. PICKENS violently opposed it as a scheme to introduce a protective tariff.

Mr. NESBITT advocated the resolution. He was an anti-Tariff man, but he wanted information. He did not consider this as necessarily involving a design to revive a protective tariff. He thought that the people of the South, and the gentleman from South Carolina and himself among them, would have to abandon some of their former positions, though still resolute against a protective system. A largely increased revenue was necessary, and must be raised by imposts.

Mr. WISE presented his objections to the creation of the committees, as a point of order, under the parliamentary law. The CHAIR decided against Mr. WISE. Messrs. BRIGGS and WILLIAMS stated cases in support of the Chair. Mr. GILMER then spoke on the subject of the resolution. He was very desirous of collecting information, practical facts, on the subject of a tariff, but feared that the committee would be made too exclusive in its character, and that the report would be ex parte. But it might present information from all sections and classes, from the planters of the South and the graziers of the West, as well as the manufacturers of the North. [The morning hour having expired Mr. Gilmer yielded.]

Mr. WISE moved to go into Committee of the Whole, but withdrew at the request of Mr. SERGEANT, who, by permission of the House, reported from the Select Committee on the Currency, "a bill to incorporate the subscribers to the FISCAL BANK OF THE UNITED STATES;" also, a bill to repeal the Sub-Treasury Law;—both of which were read twice and referred to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union.

Mr. UNDERWOOD, by permission, reported from the Committee on the District of Columbia "a bill to revive and extend the charters of the Banks of the District."

Read twice and referred to Committee of the Whole.

Mr. BARNARD, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported a bill To ESTABLISH A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF BANKRUPTCY in the United States,"—accompanied by a resolution to the effect that it is not expedient to act on it this session. Mr. B. stated that he presented the resolution in obedience to the instructions of the committee, though he was himself opposed to it. He desired the action of Congress on the Bankrupt Law this session.

Mr. MILTON BROWN, as one of the Committee, also expressed his dissent from the resolution, and moved to lay it on the table.

The House voted to lay it on the table—yeas 118, nays 81.

The House, on motion of Mr. WISE, then resolved itself into Committee of the Whole, (Mr. Gilmer in the Chair,) on the bill to provide for the support of a

HOME SQUADRON.

Mr. WISE explained the objects of the bill, and moved an amendment to make it optional with the Secretary to use two steamers or employ any other equally efficient force.

Mr. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS opposed the amendment with great earnestness. He insisted on the steamers as the most important and useful portion of the proposed naval force. (Mr. Wise withdrew the amendment.) Mr. Adams briefly advocated the bill. He pointed to the urgent importance of such a measure, in view of the grasping and prying spirit of the British Government, which was now sending its men-of-war to survey, explore and sound all the shores and waters of the Western Hemisphere.

Mr. McKAY objected to the form of the bill, as not sufficiently specific as to the details of the appropriations.

Mr. KING advocated the bill, and went into the whole subject, as a member of the Naval Committee.

After a debate, in which Messrs. Gordon, Morgan, Proffit, Hopkins, Merriwether, Wise, and others, took part, the Committee rose and reported the bill.

The bill was then passed—yeas 184, nays 8.

The House adjourned at two o'clock.