368 CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS. 



year after year, every measure for the administration of that 

 bequest ? 



Delay is denial. We have no more right to put off, through- 

 out long years, the appropriation of such a fund, than we 

 have to direct it to our own private purposes. Nonuse works 

 forfeiture as surely as misuse. Mr. Richard Rush, through 

 whose agency the fund was realized and remitted to this 

 country, in a paper read two years ago, before the National 

 Institute, remarks, that if this delay of action had been an- 

 ticipated by the English chancery judges, it " might have 

 forestalled the decree in our favor, in the unrestricted man- 

 ner in which it was made." He adds: "It is at least 

 known, that the English Court of Chancery is slow to part 

 with trust funds under any ordinary circumstances, without 

 full security that they will not be diverted from their object, 

 or suffered to languish in neglect. That tribunal asked no such 

 security from the United States. It would have implied 

 the possibility of laches in the high trustee." Paper read 

 April 8, 1844. 



Thus we are not legally accountable. The heavier, for that 

 very reason, is our moral responsibility. The gambler, 

 beyond the pale of the law, commonly retains honor enough 

 to meet his promises. We have less than the gainhh-r'- 

 honor if, sheltered behind our sovereignty, we take advan- 

 tage of the impunity it affords, and become unfaithful to a 

 high and imperative duty. 



I impute not to an American Congress I attribute not 

 to any of my fellow-members the deliberate intention to 

 neglect the objects of this trust. There is, doubtless there 

 always has been, a right feeling on this subject. The just 

 cause of complaint is, that this right feeling, like many other 

 good intentions in this world, has never ripened into action. 

 ' When you feel nobly and intend well, go and do some- 

 thing ! Do some good ; it avails nothing merely to think 

 about it." Such were the words, pronounced from yonder 

 desk, by a teacher whose impressive eloquence recently filled 

 this hall. I thought of the Smithsonian bequest when I 

 heard them. 



^ Nor is it difficult to distinguish the reason, though it fur- 

 nish no sufficient apology for this prolonged inaction. It is 

 to be ascribed, though in part to indifference, yet chiefly to the 

 difficulty of selecting between various and conflicting plans. 

 The words of the will, liberal and comprehensive, do not 

 indicate the specific mode in which the intentions of the 

 testator shall be carried into effect. Mr. Smithson left the- 

 whole of his property, failing certain relatives, and an old 



