TWENTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS, 1843-1815. 317 



and confidence of the American people. Still he admitted that it must 

 be called the Smithsonian Institution, nor did he propose that it should 

 be called by any other name. But the question was, whether the indi- 

 viduals who were named in the bill now under consideration, as 

 regarded the Smithsonian Institution, would better carry out the object 

 of Mr. Smithson than the National Institute. It was a mere difference 

 of opinion as to how the fund could be best administered. But if 

 there was any objection to a corporation, would not the Smithsonian 

 Institution be a corporation? He was sure his honorable friend from 

 Massachusetts [Mr. Choate] would not deny that it was at least what 

 was in law called a quasi corporation; and he supposed his honorable 

 friend from Ohio [Mr. Allen] would admit that it would not be more 

 democratic by making it a quasi corporation. He supposed it could 

 institute suits and legal proceedings. Who are the persons that would 

 have charge of this under the National Institute? Who are the direct- 

 ors? There was the President of the United States. Was not that 

 democratic ? Is he not the only man in our Government who is elected 

 by the whole people of the whole Union ? And who, together with 

 him, constitute a majority of the directors? Why, the Cabinet, deriv- 

 ing their appointment directly and immediately from the Chief Magis- 

 trate, who is himself the chosen of the whole American people. Was 

 that less democratic than committing the administration of this fund 

 to those intrusted with it in the bill? He thought, so far as the 

 democracy of the thing was concerned, that the administration of this 

 fund by the National Institute was quite as democratic as it could be 

 by any other mode. 



But those who have charge of this fund under the National Institute 

 will be always here. They are to contribute their valuable services 

 and time to the administration of this fund, and they are not to receive 

 one solitary dollar for those services. He believed that by commit- 

 ting to this institute the administration of this fund, two main objects 

 would be accomplished. In the first place, it would best accomplish 

 the intention of the donor; and, in the second, he believed it would 

 also give additional permanency to, and aid the National Institute. 

 Therefore, notwithstanding the denunciation of his friend from Ohio 

 [Mr. Allen], and notwithstanding the honorable Senator from Massa- 

 chusetts [Mr. Choate] considered his plan much the best and much 

 the more democratic, he [Mr. Walker] should feel himself constrained 

 'to vote, in a small minority, he supposed, for the amendment proposed 

 bj' his honorable friend from New Hampshire [Mr. Woodbury]. 



Mr. H. A. FOSTER, of New York, rose not to discuss the measure, 

 but to suggest what appeared to him to be a deficiency in the bill, 

 namely, the want of some provision for the permanency of the system 

 of management which experience should prove to be best. In the 

 proper time he would submit an amendment, the object of which 



