War to Arkansas, upon duty, being then Indian agent.

"Question 5th. Did Mr. Houston know the terms of your bid, and the terms of the bids of the other persons?

agents to work, to buy up those who had underbid him.

Mr. Prentiss, who was a bidder, casts some additional light on this subject. He not only called in vain, but he wrote in vain. The time for receiving proposals was limited to the 20th March. Mr. Prentiss says: (See Doc., pages 41 and 42.)

Answer. He asked me what my bid was, and named the amount of others. He named Mr. Butler's, and I think others. "Question 6th. Had you applied to know, at "On the 25th of March, I received a letter in the War Office, to whom the contract was gi-reply from the chief clerk, Dr. Randolph, (a ven? and what answer did you receive? - copy of which witness also handed to the com"Answer. I applied to the Indian Depart-mittee,) which is as follows: ment, who referred me to the Secretary of War, and I made several attempts to see him, but could not."

"DEPARTMENT of Wan, March 25, 1830. Sin: The Secretary of War directs me to say, that the proposals for furnishing rations to the emigrating Cre ks and Cherokees are not yet acted on, and that you will be advised of the result as soon as a decision is made. "Yours, very respectfully,

(Pages 12 and 13.) Mr. McKenney says: "The day after the expiration of that time, several gentlemen called at my office, (but two of these were known to me; these were Mr Prentiss and Judge Blake,) and inquired what decision had been come to on the bids. I an swered, I did not know. They expressed great surprise that an officer who had issued proposals should know nothing about the decision sen, whom I supposed to be the partner of Genwhich had no doubt been made, since the time was gone by, &c. I answered, I had no doubt but, on application to the Secretary of War, they would get the information they sought. That I did not know then, and, I will say to the committee, up to this hour, never having seen b.d illegal." the inside of one or more of the bids, what of. Mr. Prentiss denied Blake' participation in fers were made, or by whom submitted. They his bid, and wrote to Mr. Eaton on the subleft me, and, returning the next day, said they ject. Mr. Prentiss further says: (See Doc. had sought information, and could not get it, page 42.) adding, the Secretary was too much engaged to see them.

"P. G. RANDOLPH, Chief Clerk. "WM. PRENTISS, Esq.

"A few days after I received the letter of the, 25th March, I was called on by Gen. Van Fos

Houston, who told me that the Secretary of War had informed him that he heard I was concerned with Luther Blake in my proposals, and added, that the Secretary had stated, that, as Mr. Blake was a sub-agent, it would render the

"After the receipt f this letter, Gen. Van Fossen repeated what he had previously stated, "Being in the Secretary's office soon after, and re-asserted, that, notwithstanding the deon business, I concluded to mention to him that nial of the Secretary, he had told him what I those inquiries had been made. He answered had mentioned in relation to a connexion with me by saying, "I have received no offers ex- Mr. Blake and myself. General Van Fossen cept Houston's, in the name," I think he said, then informed me, for the first time, that he had "of Ben. Hawkins." I feel some difficulty; my the control of another bid, which was in the memory does not assure me fully, but I think name of Benjamin Hawkins, at the same price he said in the name of Ben. Hawkins. I ex which I had offered, nine cents. He then ofpressed surprise, and said, this is throwing refered to put Hawkins's bid against mine and to sponsibility too heavily on me. At this point buy or sell with me; to give or take any amount the Secretary interrupted me, and said, if men I might mention, which I declined, and refused will not be prompt, and hand in their proposals to enter into a compromise or bargain with him, in time, they have no one to blame but them. or to have any thing to do with him, in any selves. I continued my intended remarks, by shape whatever, in the business." saying I had received several packages which Mr. Prentiss proceeds on page 43: had been handed to me in my office, having "As this was the usage of the Department," written upon them "proposals for rations," and I felt that there was no impropriety in my that I had, on the afternoon of the day before making the request in the case which I was the time expired, placed them, with my own interested. I, therefore, called at the office hands, in the hands of Doctor Randolph, his of the Secretary of War, and inquired of himchief clerk, saying, these are proposals or bids if he had yet acted gn the proposals. He for supplying rations to the Indians; the time stated that he had not, and observed that it expires to-morrow, or is on the eve of expiring; was a very important contract, and of great conyou will be careful to place them before the sequence and much responsibility; that the DeSecretary of War within it. I added, I think it partment did not wish any one to lose by a condue to myself to say, therefore, that if these tract with the Government; that the supplies proposals have not been placed before you, it for the Indians that had emigrated, cost the Gois not owing to any fault of mine.” vernment, from Major Lewis's report, eight Here it appears, that, whilst other persons cents per ration; that in this case, there would could obtain no information of their own bids, be an immense number, which would make it Houston was informed, not only as to his own more difficult to be complied with; that, when bids, but as to those of others, and that he set his the whole body arrived upon their lands, there

lions instead of 11 millions, as stated by the Enquirer; and also a surplus in the Treasury of 11million six hundred thousand dollars, beyond the wants of the Government!!

to be practised upon the public, will be made There will t us be a net revenue of 22 milmanifest by looking at the dates assumed in the calculation. The amount of duties are taken as they occurred in 1829 and 1830. And this is done to show what will be the revenue in 1832! One object is to show that the reduction Why is it that we find the editor of the Enproposed by the bill will be so great that the quirer thus playing into the hands of the friends revenue will be no more, or very little more, of the tariff, by giving countenance to what than will be wanting to defray the current ex- they faintly assert will be the effect of this bill penses of the Government. Why, except for on the revenue? For months, he has been dethe purposes of deception, does the Enquirer nouncing the tariff and those who advocated take the revenues of 1828 and 1829, in prefer- it; and now he is calling upon the people to ence to the revenue of the last year, and the approve, and is himself approving, a tariff, acrevenue of the present year as estimated by tually more unequal in its operation than the Secretary McLane? Does he distrust the accu-one which he has been denouncing! And why racy of the Secretary? Is he afraid that the Se-is this somerset? Why this total change in so cretary would make an unreasonable estimate short a time? A short answer will explain al. that would operate against the viwes of the The bill was passed under the "control" of party? Certainly not. And yet he rejects the Mr. Van Buren's friends, and for a short time it estinate of Mr. McLane of $26,500,000, and is the interest of Mr. Van Buren and the party,” assumes the average of that of 1829 and 1830, to represent the bill as the only hope of the which amounts to $22,300,000, making a dif- Union. When these misrepresentations have ference of only $4,200,000. answered for a while, we shall see the EnquiBut there is another deception not less gross, rer, (compelled by the voice of the people, in another part of the article. It assumes that who must soon perceive the deception,) whirl. there is a reduction of $10,000,000. Not, about, and again denounce the tariff and its however, by this bill, but conjoined with the friends, and perhaps, as in his abuse of General reduction last year. Now what has the tariff Jackson, we shall hear his friends again be." bill to do with the reduction of the last year? wailing how the poor man was woefully deThe merits of this bill cannot be affected by ceived.

any previous reductions, and particularly when Does not the editor of the Enquirer see that those reductions were almost altogether upon he is now affording the friends of the tariff pow. the unprotected articles, of the unequal opera-erful arguments, to be hereafter used against tions of the repeal of which the south had com-us It will not suffice to tell our opponents, "plained. But it is the object of the Enquirer when these arguments and admissions are to blazon and exaggerate the concessions of the brought against us, that the editor of the Ennorth. To endeavor to convince the people quirer is a hypocritical politician, always ready that the friends of the tariff are holding out the hand of conciliation, and that if the south will only accept the great boon now offered, all difficulties will cease.

to sacrifice principle to self-interest. We be gin to think that the Richmond Whig was not much out of the way, when, some time ago, it predicted that Mr. Ritchie would come around We find a very great difference between the and advocate the tariff. He is making prepa irresponsible estimates of the Enquirer and ration! He tells his readers it is now time to those made by Mr. McDuffie in his place in the speak out." Ah! Mr. Ritchie, have you not Hose. We mean no disparagement to Mr.been speaking out" until now? You have McDuffie by the comparison. hitherto been speaking, but not out!" You Mr. McDuffie states, and we have heard no have been keeping in the dark until the pro one doubt the correctness of his statement, per time arrived; and "now" you have spoken that " he has minutely investigated the effect out," and we find you the advocate of a taproduced by some alterations from the Secre- riff, more unequal, less justifiable, and as optary's bill, and that the reductions will amount pressive as that which you have so long been. to $4,600,000." apparently contending against !

The revenue, as estimated by the Secretary of the Treasury, $26,500,000

Deduct the reduction estimated by the Secretary and Mr. McDuffie

Leaving the nett revenue from

customs

Add for public lands and bank dividends

Gives

-Deduct expenditures of Government as estimated by the Secretary

Leaving a snrplus of

4,600,000

We copy, from the Globe of yesterday, the following article:

"PRESIDENCY OF THE SENATE. "We neglected to notice the recent attempt of the coalition of the Senate to whitewash Mr. $21,900,000 Poindexter, by making him President pro tem. Mr. Calhoun, before he left the Senate, fre3,000,000 quently called Mr. P. to the chair, by way of reconciling the body to his appearance in that $24,000,000 position. We suspect he was promised this honorary promotion when he joined the coalition, and the Clay phalanx mos inflexibly re13,300,000 deemed their pledges to him We do not be here he lost one vote of the whole Clay party. $11,600,000

It is, we believe, true, that the opposition ultimately voted for Mr. Poindexter. But what ground for a charge of coalition is there in this? Mr. P. had the independence and virtue to discharge his duty faithfully and fearlessly on We would call the attention of the friends of several important occasions, and has, on that account, received the most bitter denunciation of the tariff north of the Potomac, to the extract the Globe and other kindred prints. The op- above. It is from the Georgia Journal, a leadposition, for the same reason that they voted, ing paper in that State, and is supposed to con. for Mr. Tazewell last year, having no candidate vey, on the subject of the tariff, the sentiments of their own, chose to rally on Mr. Poindexter, of the party at present in the minority. It is no and, no doubt, would have been much gratified Calhoun nullifying paper, as the Executive or if he had been elected. There are, in fact, gan takes such pleasure in calling the Free three parties in the Senate the Jackson Van Trade and State Rights journals of the south. Buren party, the opposition proper, and the in It is a real Van Buren print, and yet it is comGen. Smith was the can-pelled by the sentiments of the people to such dependent Senators. didate of the Van Buren party, the opposition denunciations of the tariff as those contained rallied upon Mr. Poindexter, and th indepen dent Senators voted for Mr. Tazewell, and voted for him to the last. This fact we know to be true, and puts to rest the falsehood of the Globe.

above. We know that the editor speaks the sentiments of the people of Georgia upon this point, and it is high time that our fellow citizens, who a.e advocates of the tariff, should begin seriously to reflect upon the consequences. But it seems that Mr. Poindexter received 22 of the course they have been pursuing. The votes, when the entire opposition vote is but object of the nullifyers is to prevent a separa20. How did this happen We know that nei-tion of the States, if the friends of the tariff obther of those who are designated by the Globe stinately persist in their oppressive and unconas the Calhoun Senators, voted for Mr. Poin-stitutional measures. In despite of all the dexter, how then did he receive 22 votes? abuse that has been heaped upon them by the We have heard it explained, by supposing open enemies and pretended friends of State that as the vote was by ballot, two of the Rights and Free Trade, they will do all they partisans of Mr. Van Buren voted for Mr. can, in consistence, with the preservation of