tors; if I should fail to urge such general considerations, which ought to, and which I trust will, induce the Senate to retain this appropriation in the bill; and that, should any appropriation be made for the following year, the particular amendment presented by the Senator from Missouri, proposing a like appropriation for 1837, will be adopted. I must, therefore, ask the indulgence of the Senate for a few minutes, with the view to show the fitness, the propriety, the urgent necessity, of erecting a fortification at the mouth of the Piscataqua, near the harbor of Portsmouth. In the first place, Mr. President, we are relieved from all constitutional difficulties in making appropriations for objects of this character. They are objects so intimately connected with the general defence and permanent security of the country, so essentially necessary to the security of public property, that there is no doubt of the constitutional authority of Congress over the subject. which It is not only within our power, but I hold it to be our bounden duty, "to provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States." So strong and so general was this sentiment, that in 1790, immediately after the adoption of the present form of government, General Washington, in his message to Congress, remarked that "among the many interesting objects objects wh will engage your attention, that of providing for the common defence will merit particular regard. To be prepared for war, is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace." In 1791 the same distinguished patriot again called the attention of Congress to the subject, by remarking "that the fortification of such places as are peculiarly important and vulnerable naturally present themselves to your consideration." [MAY 24, 1836. erty at particular points be so well defended and so securely preserved. It is, then, the voice of wisdom and of prudence, the dictate of sound policy and economy, to continue the system of fortifications-of protecting our maritime frontier, by the erection, at important and vulnerable points upon the coast, of permanent and enduring fortresses. I believe this to be the prevailing sentiment of our country; and in this day of our prosperity, in the abundance of our means, we ought to make liberal appropriations for objects of general defence and permanent protection. It cannot be controverted that some of our most important harbors, some of our principal towns and cities, some of our most valuable navy yards and naval depots upon our maritime frontier, are at this moment entirely defenceless; so exposed to attack that, in the event of a war, they would have to rely for their security upon the forbearance of the enemy. This is literally true with reference to the whole extent of our maritime frontier within the limits of New England. It is not my purpose to speak of any other point except the harbor of Portsmouth, which requires at the hands of the Government better protection, security, and defence. I leave other places to the care of other Senators better able than myself to look after their interests. I am free to admit that the opposition to this particular bill, as now modi fied, has greatly surprised me, after the expression of the unanimous opinion of the Senate upon the subject of public defence, and of the duty of Congress to make appropriations with reference to that subject. After the adoption of the resolution of the Senator from Missouri, in the early part of the session, proposing to make appropriations for the permanent security of the country, I could not but regard it, in some degree, as a pledge on the part of the Senate to give "their support to such legislative measures as shall have for their object the accomplishment of these great purposes." I could not have anticipated such an opposition as is made to this bill. It has not been urged, from the commencement of the debate to the present time, and he believed that it was not even pretended by any one, that fortifications were not necessary, and were not required by every consideration of public policy, at the various points named in the bill. It seemed to be distinctly admitted, that a proper regard to public and to private security called upon Congress to erect adequate fortifications at the several places designated in the bill before the Senate. And yet the bill was opposed--strenuously and resolutely opposed. He would, therefore, attempt to show that the opposition to the appropriation for a work of defence near Portsmouth was altogether unreasonable; and that the facts which he would present to the consideration of the Senate would, he believed, demonstrate the propriety, the peculiar fitness, the absolute necessity, of fortifying this particular point upon our maritime frontier. "The safety of the United States, under Divine protection, ought to rest on the basis of systematic and solid arrangement, exposed as little as possible to the hazard of fortuitous circumstances." In 1794 Washington communicated that, "as auxiliary to the state of our defence, to which Congress can never too frequently recur, they will not omit to inquire whether the fortifications which have been already licensed by law be commensurate with our exigencies." And, in his farewell address, he urged upon the people to bear in mind "that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it." Such were the sentiments of the Father of his Country, and such have been the sentiments of the most distinguished patriots of our republic. Such has been the favorite doc trine of every administration, with perhaps a single exception, from the formation of the Government to the present period. As a means of defence, fortifications will continue to be regarded as of primary importance; and in the language of the Secretary of War, as used in his able and acceptable report, "It is the duty of the Government to afford adequate protection to the seacoast-a subject of paramount obligation; and that we are called upon by every consideration of policy to push the necessary arrangements as rapidly as the circumstances of the country and the proper execution of the work will allow." "Every town large enough to tempt the cupidity of an enemy should be defended by works fixed or floating, suited to its local position, and sufficiently extensive to resist such attempt as would probably be made against it." This, sir, is my text, and this my doctrine. Whatever may be our reliance upon the efficiency of our army in time of war; whatever may be our confidence in the energies of our navy in the day of danger; yet it will not be denied that fortifications, well manned and well armed, are indispensably necessary for affording adequate and proper protection to our principal harbors and towns upon our maritime frontier. In no other mode or manner can the population and prop-condition. The other works of defence which were The bill proposes to appropriate for this year one hundred and fifty thousand dollars to this object; and the amendment now offered by the Senator from Missouri continues the same amount of appropriation for the year 1837. The immediate questions presented to the Senate are Ist. Would a fortification at the mouth of the Piscataqua river, under existing circumstances, be necessary? 2d. Would it be practicable? 3d. Would the cost of its erection be extravagant? 4th. Would its importance justify its probable expense? Certain the fact is, that, at this time, there are at that place no fortifications, worthy of the name. Fort Constitution, on New Castle island, and Fort McCleary, on the opposite side of the river, are both in a ruinous built during the last war, near the harbor of Portsmouth, and for its protection, were designed as merely temporary in their character, and at the close of that contest were suffered to go to ruin. It may then be stated, as a truth, that the only seaport town within the limits of New Hampshire is, at this time, utterly defenceless; that, in the event of a war, if our difficulties had not been arranged, if actual hostilities had resulted from recent collisions with our ancient ally, there is no work of protection, either on the Maine or the New Hampshire side of the Piscataqua, which could have prevented the fleet of the enemy from entering the harbor of Portsmouth, and laying waste the private property of her citizens and the public property of our Government. If the enemy had cried "havoc, and let slip the dogs of war;" if they had dared to invade our territory, to plant themselves upon our soil, they would have met a body of yeomanry too patriotic to be subdued, too strong to be conquered; and yet this fact furnishes no argument against the erection a sufficient fortification at the mouth of that harbor. So far from it, it strongly exhibits the necessity of the measure. As all such works are intended to give security against any sudden attack from the enemy, to afford protection to private and to public property, and to inspire a confidence of safety in the surrounding population, the first inquiry then, is, does the harbor of Portsmouth deserve protection and defence at the charge of the Government? On this point the Secretary of War, in his report which has been so often and so deservedly commended, when speaking of the contemplated works at particular places, (among others, at Portsmouth,) remarks: "These proposed works all command the approach to places sufficiently important to justify their construction under any circumstances that will probably exist. I think, therefore, that the public Interest would be promoted by the passage of the necessary appropriations for them." "If these appropriations are early made, most, if not all these works can be put in operation this season, and the money usefully applied as fast as their progress will justify." And he adds, "I think the measure would be expedient." There is certainly no ambiguity in this language used by the Secretary of War in his report. There is no room for doubt as to what are the sentiments of that officer in relation to this matter. And in this same document he further remarks, that "all the harbors and inlets upon the coast, where there are cities or towns whose situation and importance create just apprehension of attack, and particularly where we have public naval establishments, should be defended by works proportioned to any exigency that may probably arise. The political considerations which urge forward this_grea object are entitled to much more weight. When once completed, we should feel secure. great "There is probably not a man in the country who did not look with some solicitude during the past season at our comparatively defenceless condition, and who did not regret that our preparations, during the long interval of peace we had enjoyed, had not kept pace with our growth and importance. We have now this lesson to add to our other experience. Adequate security is not only due from the Government to the country, and the conviction of it is not only satisfactory, but the knowledge of its existence cannot fail to produce an influence upon other nations, as well in the advent of war itself as in the mode of conducting it. "If we are prepared to attack and resist, the chances of being compelled to embark in hostilities will be diminished much in proportion to our preparations. An unprotected commerce, a defenceless coast, and a military marine wholly inadequate to the wants of our service, would indeed hold out strong inducements to other nations to causes of quarrel." convert trifling pretexts into serious [SENATE. Such pure and patriotic sentiments are worthy of the head and of the heart from which they emanated. And what is their sum? That, in the time of peace, in the day of our prosperity, and in the midst of our abundance, we should be prepared for war. The quoted remarks of the Secretary have literally and faithfully described the present state and condition of Portsmouth and of that section of our maritime frontier. A fortification is all-important for the due protection and security of the harbor of Portsmouth. In a document communicated from General Bernard, Commodore Elliot, and Captain Totten, it is stated "that the only good roadstead or good harbor between Cape Elizabeth and Cape Ann is Portsmouth barbor, within the mouth of Piscataqua river. Line-of-battle ships can ascend this river seven miles above the town of Portsmouth." And I hazard nothing in saying that a safer or a better harbor cannot be found upon the whole extent of our maritime frontier. The honorable Senator from Massachusetts must be much better acquainted with these facts than I am myself. Although we are both natives of New Hampshire, and have both resided for a time in Portsmouth; yet my own residence was merely temporary, while I engaged in the prosecution of my professional studies. At a much later period the Senator was numbered among the inhabitants of that place. He must, therefore, be much more conversant with its particular history than I can be; and, Mr. President, I hope, in the course of the debate, he will lend his aid in doing an act of justice to that ancient town, and to that section of country. I am, Mr. President, in the possession of a memorial, presented to Congress in 1827 by the citizens of Portsmouth, respecting the construction of a dry dock at the navy yard at that place, which contains much valuable information upon this subject, and from which I must be excused for making liberal extracts. The memorial represents "that at every period of the history of this country, the harbor of Portsmouth has been considered of great importance for naval purposes; that, under the colonial system, and long before the Revolution, the British Government, aware of the advantages of the place, were induced to make it a resort for their vessels of war, and to establish a yard where ships of a large class were built for the public service. That, during the war of independence, the Continental Congress ordered the construction at this port of a number of ships of the United States; one of which was the America, of seventy-four guns, the first ship of the line ever built in this country. The harbor of Portsmouth is formed by a cluster of islands, on one of which the navy yard is situated, and through which the river Piscataqua, dividing Maine from New Hampshire, disembogues into the ocean. Several of these islands on each side of the channel afford effective raking positions, where such fortifications might be erected, at a comparatively trifling expense, as would render it that could be brought against it. There is no bar or completely impregnable to the attacks of any naval force obstruction at the mouth of this harbor; on the contrary, at the lowest tides, there are ten fathoms of water at the entrance through the main channel to the navy yard, and at the navy yard wharf, where ships of the largest class may lie, and from whence they may proceed to sea at dead low water. It is easy of access; and ships, when in, are safe from all storms; the loss of a vessel here, by stress of weather, being a circumstance wholly unknown. It is never, in the most intense cold of win ter, obstructed by ice: while other naval ports are occasionally closed, this is as free and open as at midsummer." Such is the harbor of Portsmouth; and the proposed fortifications at the mouth of the Piscataqua are for the defence and protection of this harbor. The position of Fort Constitution, on the New Hampshire side, must certainly, and that of Fort McCleary, on the Maine side of the river, may possibly, be occupied by the contemplated defences, I am entirely aware that ever since the famous report of General Bernard, February 7, 1821, Portsmouth has been regarded with no special favor. Although possessing advantages superior to any other harbor upon our whole coast; although the harbors of Boston and those further south are frequently obstructed by the ice; although some of them are inapproachable, by reason of sand-bars and of low water; although Portsmouth is entirely exempt from all such like embarrassments; and although this same board of engineers, in 1821, placed the harbor of Portsmouth in the very first class of those requiring works for defence and protection, and ranked it as the seventh in point of importance in that class; yet, from that period to the present, hardly a dollar has been expended for the accomplishment of the objects recommended by the board. While works far less important, in his estimation, have been erected at other points, not a single step has been taken, not a movement has been made, for the défence of Portsmouth, since the report of the board was communicated, although the importance of the station has been time and again urged upon the consideration of Congress. The fact is, we have had to contend with deep-rooted prejudices, with principalities and powers; and, in behalf of the good citizens of that section, I tender my thanks to the Committee on Military Affairs for having brought the interest, the claim of Portsmouth, to the notice of the Senate; and I cannot but believe that, after a lapse of fifteen years, Congress will now proceed to do that which was asked to be done in 1821, viz: fortify that point upon our seacoast. It is important to have a fortification erected there for the security of the public property. Portsmouth is about [MAY 24, 1836. The America, the first ship of the line built in our country, under the agency of that true patriot, the honorable John Langdon, was in 1782 presented by Congress to our distinguished ally, the King of France. The Ranger, another vessel built at that navy yard, is identified, with its intrepid commander, with some of the glorious achievements of our Revolution. This naval station is approachable by vessels of any size; it is situa. ted on an island of less than sixty acres, and is easily defended by works erected for that purpose upon any of the commanding heights by which it is surrounded. This navy yard is now so connected with the main shore, by bridges, that in case of fire it may be readily defended by the citizens of Portsmouth and the adjacent country; and it is believed that insurance of the public property on that island, by reason of the facilities of communication, is reduced at least one per cent., and is less than at any other naval depot upon our coast. Another advantage which this yard possesses over other yards, is, that it is located in the midst of ship carpenters and builders, at a point where all the materials for shipbuilding can be procured at a less rate than elsewhere; where every description of labor costs less than it does at the yard at Charlestown, Massachusetts, at Gosport, or at any other yard in our country. "Here ship carpenters, in any number usually wanted, can be readily obtained upon an emergency for repairing or building. At Gosport, nearly one-third of all the expenditures in the United States is made for the repairs of our public vessels; and at certain seasons of the year, it is not approachable. During this very last winter, if I am not mistaken, it has not been possible at all times to approach the yard. A heavy loaded seventy-four would find it difficult, without lessening her cargo, to reach three miles from the ocean, from the mouth of the Pis-that point in twenty-five feet of water, the usual depth cataqua. Almost directly opposite to the town, upon Dennet's island, is the navy yard. This is the most ancient yard in our country. I have already shown that at any season, in any wind, from any point, you can approach this yard; and, when there, you have a sufficient depth of water to ride in perfect safety in low as well as in full tide. There is no yard upon our coast which can compare with it, and will not suffer by that comparison. Ships and vessels have been built at that yard for nearly one hundred and fifty years, as the subjoined extract from a paper printed in 1828 clearly shows; and from the same extract, as well as from other records, it appears that more public vessels have been built at that yard than at any other in our country: in full tide, while at Portsmouth, at the lowest ebb, near the yard, you have always a depth of at least forty-five feet." Again: "the deterioration in the hull of ships is far less at this, than at the stations further south. A difference of twenty-five per cent. in this respect may be calculated on; an important and serious consideration, when vessels of war are for a long time laid up in ordinary." This single fact shows the all-importance of having a dry dock established at this naval station; and, with reference to this very subject, Congress passed an act on the 3d of March, 1827, authorizing the President to cause the navy yards of the United States to be thoroughly examined, and plans to be prepared and sanctioned by the President, for the improvement of the same, and the preservation of the public property therein. And by the same act the President is authorized to have constructed two dry docks on the most approved plan, for the use of the navy of the United States; the one of the said docks to be erected at some point to the south, and the other to the north of the Potomac river. "Commodores Chauncey, Bainbridge, and Morris were appointed commissioners by the President, to carry this act into effect. The high opinion they entertain1690 ed of this yard, is plainly made manifest by the improvements they recommended, and the dimensions of the ground, plans of which are here subjoined. From the Portsmouth Advertiser, of September 25, 1828. LAUNCH.-Yesterday at noon was launched, at the navy yard in this harbor, the United States sloop of war Concord. She is pronounced by judges to be one of the finest ships of her class in the navy. She is six hundred tons burden, and is pierced for eighteen guns. The following vessels of war have been built at this Dates. 1696 1749 1776 1797 "One dry dock: commandant's house, 50 feet square, 1777 with out-buildings extending 80 feet in length; houses 1782 for five officers; one, 32 feet in front, the other four 30 1797 feet, including out-buildings extending 85 feet to the reat: porter's house, 30 feet by 25; two ship-houses, each 1798 240 feet by 120, to be located one each side of the 1799 bridge: smithery, 150 feet by 60: one timber shed, 300 1814 feet by 65: two ditto, 200 feet by 65: one do. 175 feet 1821 by 65: one saw shed, 70 feet by 25: one ditto, 70 feet 1828 by 20: one timber dock, 440 feet by 200: one storehouse, 125 feet by 50: one mast and boat shed, 250 feet by 70: one rigging and sail loft, 175 feet by 70: pile wharf, 150 feet by 60: armory, tinman's and coppersmith's shop, 65 feet by 25: quay walls, additional wharves, building slip, road, anchor and gun wharf, and coal-house. "When these improvements are carried into effect, the yard will probably by levelled, the wooden buildings all taken down, except the two ship-houses, and the new buildings be constructed of brick and stone." It would be difficult to present any piece of evidence of higher authority than this report of the commissioners-which goes most clearly to establish the extent and importance of this navy yard; and which also recommends the establishment of a "dry dock" to be connected with this station. I would state, Mr. President, as further evidence of the extent of the public property at this naval depot, that there was, in 1829, ship timber deposited for use in the timber dock, and in sheds, to the value of three hundred and eighty-two thousand dollars; and that the material for ship-building has more than doubled since at that yard. Again: it is a fact, and worthy of consideration, that any given vessel of any size can be built, and is ordinarily built, at Portsmouth, from 12 to 20 per cent. less than at any other yard in the country; it results from this fact, that materials can there be procured at a cheaper rate than they can at other yards. Labor is cheaper also, and can, and does, accomplish more. Commodore Bain bridge, in his report to the Secretary of the Navy in 1827, shows the sum total of the whole cost of building each vessel at each yard, when any other vessel of a like aize has been built at any other yard, and exhibits the whole cost of building the sloops Lexington and Boston, (vessels of the same size,) and the schooners Porpoise and Alligator. It will distinctly appear that a vessel built at New York costs 15 per cent. more than one of the same size built at Boston; and a vessel built at Boston costs 10 per cent. more than one of the same size built at Portsmouth. The Lexington, a sloop, was built in New York, and cost $112,080 89. The Boston, a sloop, built in Boston, cost $96,938 40; making a difference of more than 15 per cent. in the cost of building between New York and Boston, and in favor of the latter. The Porpoise, a schooner, was built at Portsmouth, and cost $20,408 75. The Alligator, a schooner, was built at Boston, and cost $22,745 65; making a difference of more than 10 per cent. in the cost of building between Portsmouth and Boston, and in favor of the former; and hence it follows, that the difference in the cost of building between New York and Portsmouth, is more than 25 per cent., and in favor of Portsmouth. I have stated, Mr. President, all that I wish to state with reference to the navy yard at Portsmouth, and with reference to the public property ordinarily at that yard. I would, then, close this part of my argument, by adding that fortifications at the mouth of the Piscataqua would afford ample protection and security to this naval station, and to the public property there deposited. It is also necessary to fortify the harbor of Portsmouth, with a view to the better security and protection, in time of war, of the population of Portsmouth and of the adjacent country. The amount of population which would derive an immedi. ate benefit in time of war by the erection of a permanent fortification at the mouth of the Piscataqua, would fall but little short of thirty thousand inhabitants, comprising as patriotic, as enterprising, and as industrious a portion of the community, as can be found within the limits of the republic. They have strong and unanswerable claims upon the Government for protection and security. No State did more, in proportion to her means, for the achievement of American independence, than New Hampshire; she was one of the pioneers of the Revolution. No State has done more to maintain inviolate that independence; no State has received less favor at the [SENATE. hands of the Government. It is due, then, to New Hampshire, that her commercial capital-the only seaport town of her State-should be well fortified, and rendered impregnable to the attacks of her and her country's enemies. A fortification is necessary for the proper protection and security of private property. As I have before remarked, Portsmouth is situated about three miles from the mouth of the Piscataqua. It has a population of nearly ten thousand inhabitants; it has a large shipping interest, employed principally in the carrying trade; an interest, to a very considerable extent, in the South Sea whale fishery. She has also a large interest in the West India trade, and a very extensive coasting trade. It is not my purpose, Mr. President, to enter into any comparison between the tonnage of Portsmouth and the tonnage of other ports, or between the exports and imports of New Hampshire with the exports and impor's of other States. I hold such calculations and comparisons wholly unnecessary and superfluous. It is on the ground of affording a just protection to the population, and adequate security to public and private property, that I rest our claim in favor of the measure. It is on these grounds that I place my reliance for the vote of the Senate for this particular appropria tion. The Piscataqua divides into five branches, above Portsmouth. The most easterly branch is called Salmon Falls river. The tide flows up this river to South Berwick, a flourishing and populous town in Maine. Upon this branch is also situated Somerset, in New Hampshire, a large manufacturing village, with a population exceeding three thousand inhabitants, and giving employment to a capital in manufactures of nearly two millions of dollars. The next westerly branch of the Piscataqua is the Cocheco river; the tide extending up this river to Dover, a distance of thirteen miles at least from the mouth of the Piscataqua. This town now contains nearly seven thousand inhabitants, and has an extensive trade. Dover is second to no town in New England, save Lowell, in the excellence and extent of its manufacturing establishments, employing a capital of three millions of dollars. This place has also a large shipping interest. There are annually built, both at Dover and at South Berwick, many private vessels. Still further west, you strike the Durham river; at the head of tide waters stands Durham, a flourishing ship-building town. Another branch of the Piscataqua is Lamprey river; at the head of the tide waters of which is situated Newmarket, also an extensive manufacturing town, having not less than a million of dollars entirely employed in that business, and possessing a population of upwards of two thousand inhabitants. The fifth and last branch leads to Exeter, containing a population of three thousand inhabitants; a town of great wealth, and possessing also an in terest in manufactures. If the Piscataqua consisted of but one branch from the head of tide water to the ocear, and upon it were concentrated, in one town, all the population and all the business of the various towns on its branches, the importance, the necessity of protecting the entrance of this river, would be better understood. But I cannot doubt, Mr. President, that enough has been shown to prove the necessity of fortifying the harbor at Portsmouth. The project of erecting a fortification at the mouth of the Piscataqua has not a recent origin. This point has been more or less protected and defended for nearly a century. Before the period, and during the period, of the Revolution, the British Government had erected a fort for its defence and protection; and, from the adoption of the constitution to this period, appropriations have been made (sparingly, I admit) for the repairs of this fortress. In speaking of Fort Constitution, Mr. Jefferson says, that it is the remains of an ancient for tification, which has been repaired at different periods, with some improvements. From 1789 to 1830, less than one hundred thousand dollars in the aggregate had been expended by the Government upon this work. But it will be found, by referring to the tables, that there has been in almost every year some small expenditure for the purpose of making repairs. As further evidence that the Government considered it an important point, and one requiring works for defence, it will be found that, in 1794, a committee of Congress, to whom the subject was referred, reported as their opinion that the port and harbor of Portsmouth ought to be protected, and recommended an appropriation; and an act was passed accordingly. And at an after period it was resolved, that the necessary works for fortifying the ports and harbors of the United States ought to be constructed of the most durable materials, so as best to answer the purposes of defence and per manency. And in 1796, Mr. Pickering, then Secretary of War, reported in highly favorable terms of the propriety, utility, and necessity of the works erected at Portsmouth, which he represented then to consist of a fort, a citadel, an artillery store, and a reverberatory furnace, all completed. At no period of our history has it ever been hinted or pretended by any one, in office or out of office, that works for defence and security were not required at Portsmouth. There can be, Mr. President, no doubt of the practicability of the measure: it is inferrible from the facts which have already been stated; from the antiquity of the fortress, and the repairs that have from time to time been made by the Government. There is as little doubt as to the location of the contemplated fortification. Observation, experience, common sentiment, have decided on its necessity, its practicability, as well as upon its locality. Another point remains to be examined, and that is, would its erection be necessarily attended with a large and unreasonable expenditure of the public money? or, in other words, can different works of defence be devised costing less, which will accomplish the same gen eral object? This will not, and cannot, be alleged. It will not be pretended that the expense can be disproportionate to its importance; that it will cost more than it is worth. For one, I verily believe that the honorable Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CALHOUN] would give me his vote if he were certain that its actual cost would quadruple the estimate. On what ground, then, is it opposed? Its importance will not be questioned-its practicability cannot be questioned; nor will it be pretended that its cost can be disproportionate to its impor tance. It is opposed for the single reason that we have not, accompanying the Secretary's report, a map and survey, giving all the localities, and an actual detailed estimate giving the amount in the aggregate of the expenditure which will be required, and the particulars which go to make up the general aggregate. The objection is not well taken; for we have a map giving all the localities, which has been in the possession of the committee; and the facts already narrated go most clearly to show where this fortification must be erected; and we are not without book, we are not without authority, upon the cost and necessary expense for this work. By the report of General Bernard, made in February, 1821, the cost of fortifying the harbor of Portsmouth was estimated at $500,000. That is now the estimate. This is not mere conjecture. This is not, as has been stated, "guess work." The estimate was not made in 1821, nor is it now made, without calculation. They had certain principles-known data-upon which to base their estimate. The size was determined; the number of guns was fixed; the ground had been carefully inspected by the board of engineers in 1821; and was it [MAT 24, 1836 difficult for them, having fixed its size and its number of guns, to have calculated, with a great degree of accuracy, what would be its cost? It is worthy of remark, that this same board of engineers then estimated the cost of the contemplated works at Penobscot at $100,000; and it will be found, by looking into the survey and estimate made since, with reference to the cost of the same work, after a most minute, particular, and detailed computation of the expense of the requisite materials, and of the expense of the labor, that the aggregate of the cost exceeds the estimate made by the board of engineers only one thousand dollars. And such will be the result of any detailed estimate of the cost of the contemplated work at Portsmouth. The value of the material is not liable to great fluctuations; the cost of labor is very nearly the same, one season with another; and whoever sees the work completed will find that the expenditure has not exceeded the estimates. The sentiments of the Senator from South Carolina upon that point deserve much consideration. Every, wise man, who is about to build for himself a house, first computes the cost; and every wise Government, before commencing any public work, should first compute the cost. But, Mr. President, all this will be done. The Secretary of War will decide upon its form, its location, and have an accurate estimate made of its cost, before a single dollar shall be expended under this appropriation. He would do all this, in the faithful discharge of his official duty. He would do this with reference to his own reputation. Another idea has been suggested, here and elsewhere, and by way of objection to this bill, and that is, it would prevent a distribution of the public moneys among the States, to the amount of the appropriations. I shall be slow to believe that any such consideration can influence the action of this body. What works are necessary, I trust will be established; and what money can be judiciously expended, I trust will be appropriated. I am free, however, to say that the following ex. tract from the speech of a member of Congress, has in some measure weakened my faith that the bill now under consideration will be passed. "A new and strong motive for economy is now presented; a motive which would have its influence on him in regard to every expenditure. He looked forward to the passage of a bill now in progress for the distribution of the proceeds of the public lands, in effect, of the surplus revenue, among the States. He trusted the bill would pass the present session." The Senator from South Carolina says that he will vote for every measure, for every appropriation, which, in his judgment, is necessarily connected with the general defence and permanent protection of the country, and that he will go no farther. Just so far will I go, and no farther. What shall be necessary, what shall be ju dicious, whatever the exigency of the country shall de. mand, with reference to general defence, I stand ready, with the Senator from South Carolina, to appropriate; and I trust that no Senator in this body, whether the friend or the foe of the administration, would wish to do less, or could be induced to do more. Whatever the state of our affairs, whatever the condition of our country requires in relation to public defence, to general security, is matter of opinion. Men may differ, and honestly differ, in sentiment, with reference to this question; but whatever is required, whatever is clearly necessary for the accomplishment of these great objects, all profess, and I trust sincerely profess, a willingness to grant. This, then, should be the subject, the exclusive subject, for our investigation. We should enter upon its consideration with minds free from local jealousy, from sectional feeling; we should lay aside every politi cal and party excitement which may tend to mislead and misguide our better judgment. There is great danger |