496 CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS. 



that not one dollar of it was left ; he had the documents 

 before him to show that this was the fact. But the law 

 placed that in the Treasury which was not there ; it was a 

 legal fiction. It said that a certain amount had been placed 

 in the Treasury in 1836, and had remained there and been 

 drawling interest from 1836, and that the interest on that 

 sum (which -was not in the Treasury) was $242,000 ; and 

 this amount was appropriated to the erection of this institu- 

 tion, called the Smithsonian Institution. He had believed 

 it wrong ; he still believed it so. But under this law, how 

 this amount of money had been drawn out of the Treasury 

 he had never been able to ascertain. He was in hope, now 

 that a running discussion had arisen on the subject, that 

 they would be informed how this large amount of money 

 had been drawn out of the Treasury. lie could find no 

 authority for it in the act establishing the institution — no 

 authority for drawing out of the Treasury this large amount 

 of money, and placing it in the hands of their secretary, or 

 at interest, or making any other disposition of it. 



The reason why he had opposed the printing of this re- 

 port at the last session, and proposed the appointment of a 

 committee, was, that there were rumors about the city in 

 relation to the contract for erecting the buildings; it had 

 been charged that there had been bribery going on ; cards 

 had been published that there was maladministration in all 

 these matters; that there was corruption in the very incipi- 

 ency of this institution. They had been told that the 

 building was bad, that the materials furnished were perish- 

 able, -while he understood it was the design of the donor to 

 have it made fire-proof — a substantial, enduring building. 

 He wanted all these facts ascertained. Let the committee 

 take the whole matter under their charge and report the 

 facts, and let the House and the country determine whether 

 it was all right or not. 



He referred, as another objection, to the question of the 

 incompatibility, under the Constitution, of the same indi- 

 viduals holding at the same time the office of members of 

 Congress, drawing per diem and mileage as such, and the 

 office of Regents of this institution, drawing also mileage 

 and expenses from it — expenses which, when they came to 

 look into these reports, they saw were extraordinary. 



The gentleman had gravely charged that he had mani- 

 fested hostility to the institution. Suppose he had; sup- 

 pose he was determined to oppose it in every mood and 

 tense ; why, if the institution was right — if the object of 

 the individual who gave the money was being carried out — 



