TWENTY-NINTH CONGRESS, 184,5-1847. 411 



tion, but out of the Treasury. He wished this to be understood by the 

 people. 



Mr. OWEN said the gentleman might so consider it, but he did not 

 wish him to construe what he had said into an admission that he [Mr. 

 Johnson] was correct. 



Mr. A. JOHNSON said he would now propose a question to the learned 

 chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary. The first section of the 

 bill proposed to lend money to the Treasury. Suppose we had loaned 

 the fund to the United States Bank when it was in existence, and the 

 bank had failed, would the Government be bound to make good the 

 fund? 



Mr. GEORGE RATHBUN had no objection to answer, as he said; and 

 as a lawyer he would say that a trustee investing money in execution 

 of a trust, and in good faith, would not be bound to return it if it 

 should be lost. But a Government professing to be the first in the 

 world ought not, in his opinion, to avail itself of a legal and technical 

 excuse, but should proceed to see the trust faithfully executed. 



Mr. A. JOHNSON contended that the same moral reasons applied in 

 both cases. The bill itself, he proceeded to show, did not hold the 

 Government to be responsible if it acted in good faith, for it provided 

 that all the investments on account of the fund be pledged to refund 

 the money to the Treasury. This proved that the bill did not appro- 

 priate money in the Treasury, and it was not bound for the money. 



There was something a little farcical and amusing in this system of 

 normal instruction which was to provide the country with school- 

 teachers. He would like to see a young man educated at the Smith- 

 sonian Institution and brought up in all the extravagance, folly, aris- 

 tocracy, and corruption of Washington go out into the country to 

 teach the little boys and girls to read and write! Those young men 

 so educated would steal or play the little pettifogger sooner than 

 become teachers. Ninety-nine out of a hundred of those who received 

 the benefit of this Institution would hang about a law office get a 

 license become a pack of drones instead of schoolmasters. Washing- 

 ton City was not a place for such an institution. He believed that it 

 would result in an injury to the country instead of a benefit. 



Mr. OWEN asked if the gentleman was aware that the will of Mr. 

 Smithson designated Washington City as the place for the establish- 

 ment of the Institution. 



Mr. A. JOHNSON objected, he said, to the entire scheme. 



Mr. JEFFERSON DAVIS asked whether the gentleman would send the 

 money back to the court of chancery. 



Mr. A. JOHNSON replied that he objected to the whole principle of 

 the measure, and that he would send the money back to the source 

 from whence it came. 



Mr. DAVIS followed with some remarks in support of the measure. 



