Mr. SAULSBURY. I do not wish to raise any objection to the passage of this resolution, but it strikes me as a singular species oflegislation. There was no law of the land, as 'I, understand, under which the State of Massachusetts undertook to provide protection against an invasion ‘of her harbors. There was no au thority of law enablinfiher to make this expend iturc. Certainly the efense of the coast of the country is a matter proper for the General government. To allow a State to erect whatever fortifications that State may see proper without any authority of law from the General Government, and the loto pay the bill, is certainly committing a very large discretion to the States, because there are a great many works of defense and improvement which a particular State and the citizens ofthnt State may desire upon its coast that the General Government might not see proper, even in time of war, to erect. Ifa State of its own motion may undertake to erect fortifications or Works of defense which are agreeable to her own citizens, certainly it is giving that State a very great advantage for the Federal Government to foot the bill. whatever, according to the judment of the people of that State, maybe desiraile, they may go on constructing, notwithstanding the absence of any law or authority on the part of the Federal Government, and then come to Congress and ask that the bill be aid. The coast of my State was as much exposed accordin to its size as the State of Massachusetts, an it would have been very desirable during the last war to have fortificationserccted at Lewes, on, Delaware buy, but I apprehend that it would not have been proper for the Legislature of Delaware without any authority of Federal law to make such improvements and erect such fortifications as mighthave been convenient to that State and desirable to her people. It seems to me this is a species of legislation which ought not. to be cucouraged, and yet we know how very modest Mnssac usetts is. She never asks for anything but what is right, and therefore I presume she will obtain anything she does desire. At the same time I must say again that I think it is a very dangerous species of legislation. If the precedent is once set, every State hereafter in time of war will go to work, erect fortifications upon her coast, give employment to her people, s)end a large sum of money, do everything on he coast that that particular State may desire, when perhaps the federal Government would not, if it under took the work, make half the expenditure, and then when the fright is over, when nobody is hurt, when no State has been invaded, present a handsome little bill to Congress to foot. Thus a' State may have all the improvements on her coast that she wants, without ziny nuthorit of law from the General Government, and which have onlyboen pleasing and desirable to her own people, constructed at the cost of the General Government. I think the precedent is a very dangerous one.