ally 0r0WD rom th0 "CSI' OuI U ""S PsP CT. The money was not taken altogether from them.. No man ofthe East complained of the emigration. The argument that a ,naruGacturing people wished to restrain em- iVpation was, in his opinion, wholly tancItuI, Tie wished to see any measure deVIsed tor the honefit ofthe West which had been Observ- ed bv inc East Who made the Cumberland Road; was it made by Eastern votes or by Southern votes Take the Portland Canal the Wabash Canal. Take the ayes and noes, and strike from the ayes the New Englhnd votes and the Southern votes will bear down the West. It is the repr0ached New-EnG- 1 land that has supported those measures.

 Much had been said of report of the late Secretary of the Treasury. He had forgot 1 ten the report, but he believed that much in- justice had been done to that Secretary. The substance of his argument was, that in pro- tecting manufactures, the agriculture of the country was receiving constant bounty. [

 Mr. w. did not speak of the wisdom of that measure now his object was to show that the East had not been guilty of that mar row policy. He believed thlt if the Secre- tary had borrowed hls notion any where. it was not from New England source. MT. w. read from speech of Mr. McDuiiie an extract in which Mir. McDutfie said if any thing was for the benefit of Southern States. it was to stop the sale of the Public Lands MT. w. was understood to allude to this. as the source of the Secretary's views, if they were borrowed at all. Mr. w. read from the same debate an extract from his own speech, in which he contended, in opposition to MT. McDufie, that the lands should be sold as low as possible and settled, and in addition to his argument, that the settlement of the West had been assisted by the East instead of the South.

 He had never heard it suggested any where, as matter of policy, that emigration should be restrained. Some people might be some what averse to the diminutiun of cOmpara- tive importance, but there was no hostility. Were not the people of the West the de- scendants of the East were they not bone of her bone. and flesh of her flesh! It was not his disposition at first to have uttered one word on this subject. but when he heard so many hints, surnlises, and so many local al- lusions, for one, he could not hold his peace any longer. During the whole fifteen years that he had been member he had never made so many remarks of sectional char acter as he had during the present debate. But while he stood there as representative of New England, by the blessing of God he would be her true representative. and oppose any misrepresentation as to her policy or any imputaton upon her honor.

 Mir. w. concluded by moving the indrfn- ite postponement Of the resolutiou and the amendments. ....

 MT. BENTON replied that if it had depend. ed upon New England, he would proclaim it, that there would never have been a settle ment in the West. In relation to the ordin- ance of '85, MT. B. said that ordinance would ha, stiAed the West. If the policy of that act as at first reported had been supported, the West would never have had an existence. So far as depended on theNew EnglandStates the West never would had an existence. Sc far as depended on the New England States the West never would have. been settled.- The struggle for the navigation of the Mis- .lspp was s! stEGnHssE da6aest the Esst ed that the Mississippi was to be shut up fo 80 years. and as sine qua non. Spain was tt take train oil and cOdfsh from the United States. id est from ew-England. In the debates carried on for three years, nine States cOntended that the failure to make treaty, made the surrender of the navigation 0bliga- tory. seven States contended against. How did it terminate Upon the remonstrance of the State of North Carolina, presented with all the energy of State determined not to allow her citizens to be maltreated. the States north of Maryland went in favor of, and the States south presented one undivided front against the cesson. God protect him from such allies.

 In relation to the settlement of Ohio, and the triumph of Wayne, Mr. B. said that there never was a Federal Soldier north of the Ohio. The battles were fought by the vol unteers of Kentucky, who swan the river not only against the rifles of the Indians, but against the law of the United States.

 In relation to the Tariff, Mir. B. contended that the West had assisted to make Tariff. aud that the New-England votes went togeth- CT against the further protection of Hemp. and that the duty upon that article was ob. tained by the votes of the South.

 The Senator from Mass. had referred to the history of the government to show what was the policy of the first Congresses in re lati0n to the lands. Mir. B. alluded in reply

 that policy. The first price fixed was twenty cents per acre fixed by Mir. Hamil. ton. Had this policy and price been pursued. Mr. B. believed the government would have derived more money from them, than they had since. The interest on the Public Debt amounted to as much in sixteen years as the whole worth of the Public Land. It was inc early policy to sell the lands as fast as possi- ble..

 He rose for the purpose of joining issue with the Senator from Mass. upon the point that the East had been the allies of the West. and the South its opponents. And as he had some further views, he should nos,none ther,