University of South Carolina Libraries
proved. they have, from the highest bred H? rd Book heifer, down to the lowest grade. (never Iocs than half blcod,) been ws h*?s!rn7 and a? harJv as the common % strvknt'thn country, kept side by sid-* with them. The opinion, therefore, that Durham* rtre to be rejected for want of hardihood, or constitution, is but a predjudice that deserves to be exploded. 3tiU I am no enthusiast in this matter. I would not recommend everv femur to Introduce tnto his farm the Durham cow On the contrary, on very thin and light ao Is, t Would not introduce them: nor ? i _ - _ t aft? thing else that ever uvea on a luxuriant one* But I do say, on land? natural to grass, which afford a fair yield of pas. lure And of hav, where either the dairy or the fatting of beef, or even the rearing of rattle for sale, ho the object, judgin# from my own experience, and corroborated by that of others who have tried ? single cross upon our native, or anyo'h. er br*;vl of cattle, no matter what, even up to high grades, the Durhatnsaro alto, pother the most desirable, both for appearance and for profit; with the excepts. , perhaps, of the Devonshire, if tiie climate be very rigid ; and they ure not niilkftrs. Were I ajdairyrnnn, and desired to grow uparareof the best and most profitable milkers I would select the best native cows within mv reach, then obtain a thorough bred short bom bull of a good milking family, and raise mv heifers to as high grades us in their natural course would he produced, always using a thorough bred hull, for in no other way can the excellence and the true characteristics of the race he perpetuated. Did I however, admit of any other foreign admixture, it should he a cross of the Devon to give additional snugness to the form; and then hut a single cross, for more than that would degrade the milking qualities ofthe herd. These animals, bred as they would be from native cows, would inherit their constitutions and habits, and hecome identified, as much as the most ordinary stock, with our soils and our habits of keeping. In this way should we at once gain all that.we desire, without sudden or prejudicial change. In 1835, my faiher imported a most beautiful and valuable cow from England, one of the finest animals and best milkers I ever knew ; a very hardy, thrifty, and ensilv kept animal. She brought us three very superior bull calves, all from short boms. They were like herself, of peculiar conformation and character, being the most compact in flieir figures, possessing rr ore weight in a given compass than any animals I ever saw. In the fall of 1839 the cow, and her then sucking bull calf, were sold to Norman C. Baldwin, Esq. of Cleveland, Ohio, for $800 ; her two year old bull calf, " Reed Jacket," to Mr. Sullivant, of Columbus, Ohio, for $800; and her yearling bull calf, *' Sam Patch," to J. H. Henburn, Esq. of Jersey Shore, Lycoming co., Pa. for $J00. Had I at that time known the exceeding value of that family of short horns, I should certainly have reserved one of them. My J bulls have proved in the highest degree! valuable as stork getters, stamping their j calves in the first cross with deep charac- j teriaticsof their own blood, andnodnubt. faying the foundation of a race of milkers that will vet be famous in their respective localities. Thev arc estiniatedns thevshould be, almost beyond price. In same these) particular animals, because thev devclnpe in all noints of hard hood, endurance and 1 !cinH!y feeding, the valuable characteristir.8 we desire in our farming stork, and fully corroborate afi that I have remarked of rearing up a n:/<ice stock front judicious crosses of pure short horn hulls. Many years ago, the agent of the Holland Land Company, Mr. Otto, purchased a thorough bred short horn hull from Mr. Powell, of Philadelphia, for the benefit of the settlers of the company lands in the counties of Gennesee, Cattaraugus, and Chauntauque, comprising some of the ^cst grazing and dairy counties of the state. As the services of the hull were obtained for little or nothing, and as he was kept in successive seasons in each of the counties above named, a general sprinkling of his stock was soon scattered throughout those regions, and some as high as three-quarter bred animals were raised from his progeny. The hull lived many years, and proved an excellent stock getter. Many of the cows now ranging about the streets and commons of Buffalo and Black River Rock, which Jhiive been brought in and sold from those ^counties, are of this stock, and are distinguished for their superior appearance, and so'Lr as niv inquiries have extended, tlmy arc of the finest quality as milkers ; -anti vyct none but those who are convercn.rrt fH/ . TV, rhrjm hlrvrwt Lrnrku/ flint it hey are.any Nut common cows. These cows are celebrated ?ainnng our c'airv farmers for -milkers , and numerous fine .and extraordinary fat oxen that have been slaughtered at Buffalo from the surrounding country, were descendants of the " Otto l>ull9'* either of the first or second generation. I have now done with the speech of Mr. Coltnan, which, for feis own sake, and the welfare of our agriculture, I regret he had not more maturely considered. Yet, if he be still sanguine tn his confidence of the superiority of the Massachusetts " native stock" as milkers, could the thing be J ? i.e. i i i _ i ii t__ mane pracucu. uu, ? woijiu giauiv muke n triul of merit by aetnal test. I would propose that Mr. C- or his frtesds produce ten or twenty cow*, which should be a fair average of the native stock, without admixture of foreign hluod ; against which, f would droduce a like number of grade. - ? - r or {kwough bred short horns, of average. quality,or taking them aj they rise, in any fair herd. The time of their calving should be noted, and the .cows should be X>f nearly corresponding ages?the trial should commence on llie fi-rvt ot June, and continue ono month ; {-lie eo.vs all to i)C kept in one Hold, o: i:? uv gu d vr:?i i aesgg J and ort pasture only, te each party should j 1 :>lc\f=9, if not conveni'mtt *o bring them ! ! toother. The quantify of milk should i ' he accuraMv weighed. and fho produce, < either of butler or cheese, dulv registered. I*' w When the trial should be fully made, the j winning party to be entitled to the whole j herd, with the product, after paving ex* j peases. If the advantage should be on the side of the /iritivc owners in value, as j ! it probably A'ftuld, each animal should he | appraised, and a sufficient sum to make j up fho difference should he deposited to j render the premiums thus submitted of e-! ^ qual value. This would test the whole | question, and give it sufficient of interest j to engage in the trial with spirit. The : season, is perhaps, now too far advanced I ?1__ *i? .1.:.. K.,f ;r hio j 10 ifiUKtt i ne iriui iiiin % cfi i , win 11 iin.1 | i proposition be accepted. I would enlarge | ! it, and name the first dnv of November j ! next, for selecting the animals on both I ! sides ; they should be then placed together ! ! on one farm, and both subjected to the ! same treatment through the winter, and kept together till the trial was thoroughly ! made, which, it either party preferred, might extend through the next season, or uniil the first day of October following. If it be objected, that this proposition j will incur too much expense, orinconvenj ience, I will at once propose that Oneida J county, in this state, shall he the place of | trial; and that myself, or my friends, the ! advocates of the short horns, will furnish { a farm for the operations, the fitness of which shall he assented to by the other party. The importance of an accurate knowledge on this subject is a sufficient object for such a trial, and it is perhaps the only method of testing this mooted y * question fairly. It will he readily seen 1 I therefore that this proposition arises in no ) spirit of banter, or gambling, but in that J of an earnest desire to settle an important | and doubtful point, of great interest to, j our agriculture generally. ; I may at a future time, pursue this sub. j ject further, but have for the present tres- 1 i passed sufficiently upon your patience. Lk wis F. Allbx. J I r>r , rt 7 A ? ! i i\ 1^4 1 \ BUICK lioc/c AffTUt ii/j lotii | mmbmmwm? i i mimaamaaasam COAGRESSIOiVA L. I'hk McLkod Case. [The following is the material part of | Mr. Rives' reply to the part of Mr. Buci hanan s speech copied into this paper last week.] From the National Intelligencer. o debate in the senate. The case of McLcod. Thursday June 10, 1841. The question of the Senate being the motion of Mr. Rives to refer so much of the President's Message as relates to our foreign affairs to the committee on Foreign Affairs, and Mr. Buchanan having concluded his remarks on the subject, as published in vesderday's paper? 1 * 4 Mr. Rives rose in reply, and commenced by observing that, as a member of the Committee nn Foreign Relations, it was fit and necessary that he should c .ersom; remarks on the subject which had tims been urged on the notice of the Sj sate. Nothing couid present a moio sinking ex. ample of the tendency of all subjects j discussed in our public bodies to assumes i party character than the remarks of the ! honorable Senator from Pennsylvania ' (Mr Buchanan,) which had just been j submitted to the Senate. T:ie gentleman j had commenced bv a disclaimer?most i honestly uttered, Mr. R. had no doubt? ' of the influence of anv thing like party feeling in what he should say ; and yet i he had h irdly entered upon the threshold ' of his subject, when the habitual and un- I conscions bias of a parti/ man, as the j Senator frankly avowed himself to be, i exhibited itself as a manner too uncquiv- ' oca I to be mistaken. AH who have had occasion to treat, in J our legislative halls, questions such as j thai now oresented to tiie notice of the 1 I I Senate, must have felt how difficult it of[ ten is to reconcile the impulses of an j American spirit with the measure and re; serve which might seem to he due to the j natural susceptibilities of foreign Powers i In the view taken bv the honorable genr> ! tleman of the aggravated character of the j outrage perpetrated in the destruction of i the "Caroline" Mr. R. said he heartily concurred. The gentleman had not ut- i tered a word in reprobation of that trans. [ i action to which his heart and his judgment j did not respond. But the very terms in j which the Senator denounced and charac- j tcrized the aggression made it a national j wrong, to be redressed by national means, j and not to be avenged by visiting the responsibilities of this public offence on the head of such an instrument as Alexander MrLood. if. indeed, be were at all ! an actor in the scene, as there is every! reason to (relieve he was not. Mr. Rives said he should endeavor, in the outsi t, to recall the discussion to its ! true merits?to the question of interna- j tional law, which the Senator from Penn- j svlvania had adverted to only in the close ; nf his remarks. Fie should dace it in the foreground of tho argument, because j bvitonlvcan the conduct of the Admin. ! istration, in the particular in which it is i now impugned, he fairly tried and I j judged. lie would not go back to recap-.I | itulate the history of the controversy re- J sDectinjr the destruction of the Caroline O further than to show the new position which the question assumed immediately upon the accession of the present Admin- : j istration to cower. } Tins unwarrantable outrage, involving! j a violation of the national sovereignty j over our territory, as well as the destruc (icn of the T'e? a id property of Amori- j -i '? t" "'it" J j ran citizen*, was committed in December, 1837, and aroused a general feeling of indignation throughout the Union. Our minister at London, under the instructions of the Government here, addressed, i in May, 1838, a represensation to the British Government on the subject, to obtain a. "disavowal and disapproval of i the act, and also such redress as the nature of the case required-" Notwithstanding the enormity of the outrage, as painted in this very communication of our minister at London, drawn up in conformity to instructions from Washington, the'late Administration, the Senator's political friends, in whom he thinks there was no want of energy in prosecuting the demand for redress, a:tually slept over this national injury from May, | 1838, to March, 1841, when they went out of power! And so profound was their slumber that, in a late debate in the House of Commons, the British Secretary of State for Colonial Affairs, Lord John Russel, stated that the complaint of the American Government was, for a long period, considered as dropped. It is true that Mr. Stevenson, who could not hut feel the awkward contrast between thd lofty tone of his communication to Lord Palmerston, in May, 1838, and the pa. tient acquiescence which followed4n the long continued silence of the British Government, did, in July, 1839, write to Mr. Forsyth to know if he should renew the subject with Lord Palmerston, and, if so, the degree or urgency he should adopt. | To which Mr. Forsyth replied no; "the j President expects, from the tone of Mr. j Fox's conversation, that the British Government will answer your application in the case, without much further de. lay." But, in pcint of fact, no answer was given by the British Government down to the period of the late Administration's exit from power. All this while, then, the destruction of the "Caroline" stood uncrplaincd and nnavowed by the British Government, and there was nothing of a conclusive na- j ture to determine whether it was to be i viewed as an unauthorized act ofindividuals or as the public act of the British authorities. In this state of things, McLcod, in November last, came into the State of New York, and having, from bis idle, and, as is now universally believed, I false boasts, incurred the suspicion ofhaving been a guilty and conspicuous actor in the destruction of the Caroline, he was arrested and indicted therefor upon a charge of murder arson. Mr. Fox, on - * * II .1 the 13th of December, demanded ??t tne i Government of the United States the lib. erafion of iMcLeod, on the ground " that the destruction of the Steamboat Caro. line is well known to have been a public act of persons in Her Majesty's service, obeying the order of their superior authorities." The demand was refused because the Government of the United !nd no right to interfere with the judicial :riotinrils of New York, which ban tak*;!? cognizance of the case; and in .egardto the decimation of Mr. Fox, Mr For.^vth stated that "if the destruction of the Caroline was a public act of persons in Her Majesty's service, obeying the order of their superior authorities, the fact has not been before communicated to the Government of the United States j by a person authorized to make the admission. and it will be for the court which has taken cognizance of the offences with which McLeod is chnrged to decide upon its validity, when legally establish, cd before it." Mr. Fox recurring to the same subject, in his letter to Mr. Forsyth / -> r\ 1.? 1 Q 4 A 01 lfl6 ^^11] yCoCIHDCr) lotuj anutu uiui j "lie was not authorized to pronounce the decision of Her Majesty's Government upon the remonstrance which had been addressed ?o it bv the United States against the act in question." Thus stood the question at the acres, sion of the present Administration. The destruction of the Caroline had not as yet been avowed by the British Government as a public and authorized act. But on the 12th of March, eight days after the inauguration of President Harrison, Mr. Fox addressed a letter to Mr. Webster, Secretary of State informing him that he was instructed by his Government to state that "the transaction" (the destruction of the Caroline within the territorial limits of the United States,) "on account of which McLeod was arrested, waf a transaction of a public character, planned and excuted by persons duly empowered by Her Majesty's colonial authorities to take any steps and to do any acts whifch Kq nooocaaru fXr tlm flofpnrp of Hef 11111 L lAi liwvwgui j IVI ?MV uwkvuww Majesty's territories, and for the protsction of Her Majesty's subjects; and, consequently, that those subjects of Her Majesty who engaged in that transaction were performing an act of public duty, for which they cannot he made personally and individually answerable to the law9 and tribunals of any foreign countrv." o " (Jpoa these grounds, he was instructed to demand again from the Government of the United States the immediate release of Alexander McLcod. This communication of the British Minister gave a new aspect to the subject, and presented for the consideration of the American cabinet a grave question, of the first importance in the intercourse and responsibilities of nations. The destruction of the Caroline, for a supposed participation in which McLeod had been arrested and indicted in the courts of New York was now avowed by the British Government to have been an act of public military force, planned and executed ' V ***' ' by competent public authorities, in alleged defence of Her Majesty's territories, and, as such, was justified by Her Majesty's Government at home. How'* yr unwarrantable the act, from that moment it could be viewicd only as a national wrong, the full responsibility of which was assumed by the British Government, and in which the individuals concerned were but irresponsible instruments, acting under orders which they were implicitly bound to obey. [Concluded on fourth page] SPEECH OF MR. WISE, In defence of Mr,, Websters Letter to Mr. Fox. Mr. Wise said: Sir, I cannot sustain this resolution innny aspect it presents. In thefirst place, iit is out of time. Negotiations are pending, and we are too much in the habit in this country of making diplomatic correspondence public | before negoti ations are brought to maturi- I ty. By this means every man in the na-1 tion is too frequently made a Secretary of State to settle foreign affairs, and a biassed public sentiment is afforded the opportunity to constrain or embarras an enlightened Cabinet course of conclusion. The adoption of this resolution now might interfere with the action of both the coordinate departments of the Government ?the "Executive, which is negotiating, and th?> Indiciarv. which is deciding upon the case of McLeod. j | But, in the second place, the advocate j of this resolution (Mr. Ingersoll) has put it out of my power, were I so disposed, to vote for it. Pie has accompanied its in- j troduction with such a course of remarks j that its adoption could not be considered as any thing short of an implied censure j upon the present Secretary of State for the position which he has assumed in relation to this affair. Seeing nothing ' to censure and every thing to approve in tbe conduct and correspondence of both the present and late Secretaries touching this whole case, I shall avoid the least implication of the censure which I consider involved in an affirmative vote on this proposition. Mr. Forsyth has been attacked by nobody, and therefore needs no defence. What has Mr. Webster done in ; this matter, since the honor and interest , of the nation have been confided to his j care, to draw down upon him directly or i indirectly, the censure of this House?? j Why, sir, on the 12th day of March,. 1841, Mr. Fox,, 44 in the name of the Brit- j | ish Goverameut," demanded 44 the imme- | | diate'release of Mr. Alexander AfcLeod." I Now what .should have been the courso I of Mr. Webster, in the name of the United j States? The rule to govern him, it strik- ! es mc, was to place his Government in ! the attitude and assuming the beaming oi j a noble-minded, generous, gallant man. j conscious of his own dignitv, weight or' character, an d power of scli-redres-, when j appioached by another man in any doubt- j ful or ambiguo lis shape of peace or hostili-1 ty. The onl y exception to this rub: should be that a nation may be mure slow to anger ;ind resentment, more pacific in its temper, more conciliating and forbearing in i ts conduct and correspondence, than a a individual in a personal nunrrel. Mr. Fox's demand was doubtful and amhigr.ou s. Its meaning was either! arrogant or overbearing, intending to He-1 rnand somethi ng which neither the law of nations nor ou r own peculiar state and federal relations could allow ; or it was j urgent only in demanding what was due I under our own laws and the laws of civil, ized nations, "without disrespect to the Government oi*the United States or its j constituted authorities. The Secretary tells that its do! )tful "occasioned, with the I President, som e hesitation," and thus in- j limited delicately that our Government [ was not insensi ble to its own self-re*pect I and a consctou p dignity and generosity which true grea tness always feels, very properly chose to construe this dem ind as intended to be: respectful, and to be a demand only of what was lawfully due? nothing. In this the Secretary was very com- | mendably right. He left it to a dandy- j dignity and a cockney knighthood to flare I up" upon a point of mere etiquette and punctilio, to rage about nothing and get nothing for its rage,' and he rightiy assumed, against the letter if you please, j that Great Britain in addressing the United Slates of America, could not mean otherwise than to be decorous, respectful, and just in her demands. This was almost a matter of course ; quite a matter of course, unlessgross a.nd palpable haughty insult was hurled, which could not be ? ? -i a ; a a i j: l oroKea wunoui insi nni anu iiiuignuni resentment. It was due to ourselves no less than to Great Britain, whom we had taught to respect us, to say, You cannot possibly mean any disrespect to ms, to demand more than what you think lawfully right; and we will therefore;, respectfully examine your claim and proceed to dispense justice to you." This course was magnifying ourselves, and belittling the mightiness of Mr. Fox ; it was truly " partonizing his wrath," and well, very well, done. But, in the place, Mr. Webster tells Mr. Minister that if the demand of Her Majesty's Government meant more?to require the Federal Executive to usurp judicial power, to interfere with the course i of municipial judicatures, to interrupt jus- \ tice in the forum, to obstruct the authority of the courts of law under criminal or civil process, or to violate the rights of the State of New York?it meant something which could not " have been expected" from either Government, and something 44 to which to this Government cannot accede" And this Government has not acceded to any such demand. The President calmlv tells us in his message, dated : li? ?u?.u _r \r_ T? , i long since me icuers uuui ui mi. i ua ami Mr. Webstor, "it may be proper to stale 1 that Alexander McLeod, has been heard | by the Supreme Court of thfe State of New I York, on his motion to be discharged j from imprisonment, and that the decision f of that Ccourt has not yd been pronoun \cedThe demand, then, in any and | every offensive sense, has been both theoretically and practically refused. And thirdly, sir, so tar from croughing orsucumbing, in a wav to tempt aggression; on, when Mr. Fox avows " it was F.nglarrd, Mr. Secretary, and not Mr. Mc leod," Mr. Webster does not, liku a cow. ard, select the weaker adversary, the poor individual, but replies: " Ah ! very well. Mr. Minister, I now understand you. If England assumes the responsibility, I readily admit that4 individuals otght. not' ?he does not say shall not bo?ought. not to be holden personally responsible ; 4the&President presumes that it can hardlv be necessary to say that the American People, not dirtrvstful of their ability to re\ dress public wrongs by public means, canJ not desire the punishment of individuals, ' when the act complained of is declared to have been Ret of the Government itself. , We therefore take you at your word, Min?ster, and hold England, responsible. We :11 i ? *L_ ..i. .c l .1 i_ J 1 win leave uic coui is ui jubilee 10 ueai with AfcLeod?av, even send our Attor! ney General, as amicus curia*., to advise the court to discharge him, it*you chose. The United States will deal with EnglandV j Nothing could be more proudly gallant, , and generously brave; and he mistakes j the point of chivalry much, who would j censure a true knight for ? seeking a foe- ' ' man worthy of his steel." This is mv view of the case. The Sec- j retarv has my thanks, and shall not have ! mv censure. I have confidence, full con- j fidence, in his American heart and A- j merican head to maintain the honor and ( ' interest of my country, and its present! Administration, in controversy with any t ! foreign Power ; and as long as he main- : ; tains both, as he has in this instance of | | ?.[cLeod, that confidence shall be grate- < I fully continued. ! Correspondence of the Charleston Courii er. Washington, July 3. Though this is the last dav of the fifth , week of the extra session, there is leas pros- , pact than ever of a speedy despatch of. the public business. The discordant! opinions in the Senate in relation to the j details of the bank charter are not likely j soon to be reconciled, each parly support- j ing its opinion with great pertinacity.? . The debate, to-day, was very animated and interesting. Mr. Choate of A/ass., came out rather unexpectedly in support of Mr. Rives' plan. Me advocated it as j likely to give harmony to the Whig par- j tv, and continue its ascendency. If it was forced upon the States, in opposition i to their cnostitutional opinions, it would j have an unquiet time, being like a fortress i on the border of an enemy's territory. ' It would be the object of continual jenl- j ousv and hostility. He said he knew that if we did not embrace the plan pro- j posed by the administration we should have no bank at all. Jfr. Clav inquired what was the source ' af itf. OU/vtitn'iS 1/nAiiilo/drv/i i,n tiilo nulilt ill 1FJL ! U/Iiuaic W fNll^n UII imo |/?MUU | Mr. Choatn said he could not refer to it j without a breach of order. Subsequently, in consequence of a re- j mark of Mr. Archer, Mr. Clay explained I that he found it to be the opinion here ! that the charter would not go beyond the j two houses, and he was desirous of know- j ing the reason for the opinion. Hp had therefore proposed a question to iMr. i Choatc, when that gentleman asserted j with a po.sitiveness that surprised him 1 that we could have no hank unless we j took this amendment. The answer indi- j cated that the opinion was authorized by i the President. He was anxious that this j should he avowed, and that if the President ! had disclosed his opinions with a view to ' operate on this body, it should he known. I Mr. Chonte protested against the infer- ; ences of the Senator. He had not heard j a syllable from the President or any one j of the Cabinet on the subject, but he ! gathered from circumstances that the j i- .t ci i r _ ... 1.1 i i project oi me scnaior irom j\v. comu uoi; succeed. Mr. Simmons, of R. I., opj>osed Mr. j Rives'amendment, and replied, with some : point, to his arguments. Mr. Archer, of Va., unequivocally cen- ! sured the course of his colleague, and denounced his amendment and the reason upon which it was founded. He declared | that no one here approved the Treasury ( project, hut his colleague and others had embraced it because the President was in , favor it. He said he should vote against both projects. Mr. Rives replied with some severity. The debate will bo continued to-day. Washington, July 4. Ji In the Senate, yesterday morning, some explanations were made in reference to j ( supposed personal reflections occuring in j -i-i? * ? AT P urea ! CJUDiUC lilt? U?_y UUIUIC. iviTvg || and Archer mutually explained, and were , entirely reconciled. Mr. Clay also took | occasion to say that in pressing his ques- i, tions upon Mr. Choate as to the source of I , his knowledge as to the fate of the bank | bill, he had no intention to treat him with j any unkindness, &c. Mr. Linn, after a high wrought eulogy on General Jackson, , animadverted with some severity on the | remarks which fell from Mr. Archer in | regard to that individual, and announced , his intention to go all lengths hereafter j in vindication of that venerable man from | any personal assault on the floor of the ( Senate. j The debate then Droceeded in a very ------ g ^ ^ calm and grave manner, befitting the im- | portance of the question. Mr. Bayard , expressed his entire assent to the constitu- , tional doctrines of Mr. Clay in regard to \ a bank, but contended that the amend- j ment of Mr. Rives implied no abandon- r ment of those principles. He moved to j amend 3/r. Rives' amendment so as to f provide that the States respectively should c Wjf j he deemed as assenting to the establish. | ment of branches therein, unless they dedared their dissent, through a legislative ! act. passed within a certain time. j Mr. Phelps, of Vt., advocated Mr. i Rives' amendment, but declared that ho ! had no doubt of the constitutional power ! of Congress to establish a bank with | branches without the assent of the States, and he protested against any inference* from this provision unfavorable to the existence of that power. He believed that every practical end that was desired could be obtained without asserting a disputed power; but if ho found, after experiment, that such would not be the case he* would then go as far as any one in grantng additional powers, under the charter. Mr. Huntington, of Conn., spoke in reply, and maintained that the adoption of the amendment would be a virtual' abandonment of the constitutional powers of the government, and that they could never he resumed. Here the debate was dropped, for the present, and the Senate went into Executive session. There aro no limits, that I can see, to the contmu^ ance of the debate. Almost every whigSenator will speak. The loco Senators keep aloof from the discussion. They have, it is said, agreed to take no part in' I it, but to reserve themselves for an assault on the bill when its friends-hnve determined what it shall be. There areabout a dozen Senators with Mr; RivesThe locos must therefore decide the fate of his amendment. From present ap. pearances, they will, 1 think, go against it. The final question will then be on the passage of Mr. Clay's biH. Those of Mr. Rives' friends who act merely from expediency, will then go with Mr. Clay, and it is probable that the bill will pass.? Its fate in the House is doubtful, but if it reaches the President, without Jfr. Rives' amendment, it will he vetoed. The following is Mr. Bayard's modifi- f cation: f . " Strike out all after the word " corporation" and insert, "may establish agencies, to consiht of three or more persons, or to employ any hank or hanks, at any places fhey may deem proper, to perform the duties hereinafter required of the said corporation as the fiscal agent of the Government, and to manage and transact the business of the said corporation other thnn> the ordinary business of discounting promissory notes. That is to say, thesaid corporation shall have the right at such agencies to receive deposites, to deal or trade in bills of exchange, gold or silver coin, or bullion, or goods or lands, purchased on execution, or taken bona fid* in payment of debts, or goods which shall be the proceeds of its lands, and to circulate its notes. And moreover, it shall belawful for the said Board of Directors to convert such agencies into offices of discount unless the Legislature of any particular State in wYch such agency shall he established, shall, at its next session after such agency is established, express its dissent thereto." WASHIXGTON, JULY 5. General Scott, now Major General is here and apparently in fine health. His residence, hereafter, will heat this city. The promptness with which the President has acted in this appointment, is descrv. 'vT ..Ammon^ntiAn Snrrw? HliniWP hut 111^ IM 1 VIIIIIIOMMHIfVI'* ? ".? Gen. Gaines will refuse to obey orders from Gen. Scott. Mr. Gilmrr'scommit, tee of retrenchment, which is to report at the next session, have before them the question of abolishing the office of Major General. We lenrn, from private sources, that the decision of the New York court will f he adverse to the release of McLcod, but still they will not. at present, decide on the sufficiency of the plea that he acted under the authority of the Bri : h Gov. ernment. Thnt questiea is to be argued at the July term. The opposition have made a question of the policy and the patriotism of the course* taken by the present Administration, in admitting that McLeod ought to be released upon the avowal by the British Government of the act of which he was the instrument. The question is between Mr. Van Buhex's course and Mr. Ty. ler's course. The policy of the late administration is simply this?to remain in. active on the question for four years; to cover up and conceal the kindling fire as long as they were in power, - then to eive the alarm, ring the fire bells, and accuse the new administration of a want of patriotism. The honesty of that course there can he no dispute about. On the other hand, the present administration, on coming into power, found that this, great outrage on our. national rights and dignity had been unatoned for. There were but two modes in which they could seek satisfaction?one was the mean, humiliating mode of punishing those individual agents who plight fait into our hands; and the other was tode~ mand satisfaction of the principal, by whom the act had been avowed. The latter course was taken by the present J???? i!? _- j u lamirnsiruuon, anu u 19 uuuuuu iu uuv^ uven in the fury and blindness of defeated faction, an apology for any opposition to it. There is one reason, if no other, why every American should maintain the administration, in the present position of this matter, viz: that the negotiation is X now pending; that the answer of the Britsh Government to our demand for redress nas not been received; and that, in case nf a refusal on their part, to render satisfaction, the result will be wat! It is for the purpose of calling attention to this view of the matter that I notice the subject at all. It appears to have been 1 1"?J K*? monvr that ikio orlmintufra. jvenotmcw uy ? ?"/ m?*? iuio nuiiiiiuokiuion, by the course which they have ta. ven, are pledged to press their demand for edress upon the British Government even o var ! There can be, there will be no linching on their part. There is no reas>n to believe that the'Britisb Government