Mr. HENDRICKS. Mr. President, I shall vote for the amendment proposed by the Senfrom Missouri, but not exactly for the reason given by him or by the Senfrom Kentucky. I shall vote to strike out this section because I think the system of drawbacks is in itself vicious and ought not to be adopted. For the purposes of revenue, as indicated by the advocates of this bill, it is thought proper to impose a tax upon iron, copper, cordage, &c., that are imported into the country. They are introduced; they come through our ports; they come into the hands of the merchants; they have paid their tax; and they stand with the price upon them in the markets of the country which the original cost, transportation, and taxes have fixed upon them. They are purchased by men who then propose to use them for the purpose of building ships. After the money has gone into the Treasury, because a man will use these articles in the building of ships he is allowed to go to the national Treasury and take the money out. It is. when reduced to a clear statement, an authority to a man who will build a ship to go to the Treasury and draw from the Treasury a certain amount of money. I say that system is vicious. In the West the plowshare, the sunlight, and the rain bring to us our wealth; and when the farmer has paid 2 dollars more upon his plow because the material is taxed, can he go to the Treasury and demand that 2 dollars back? Is agriculture not as great an interest as commerce that it shall not be equally protected? The man who builds a ship can go to your Treasury and demand a certain sum of money because he has built a ship; but the man who makes and uses a plow has no such benefitfrom the legislation. I oppose the system, whether it be extended to sailing and steam vessels, or whether it be confined exclusively to sailing vessels. The thing is vicious; it is not equal; it is not just; it is simply paying out of the national Treasury men who will put their investment in a certain line and structure. Mr. President, I am surprised to see the excitement of the Senfrom Missouri upon this occasion. He becomes excited that the interests of one section are promoted at the expense of his section and mine. Ordinarily it is enough to arouse some degree of feeling; but does the Senfrom Missouri not know that there are ten States of this Union that are not rePresented in this body ten agricultural States, ten States that would stand by his State and my State if they were allowed to vote upon a question of this sort? I say until this Union is completely restored, until the agricultural labor of this country is fully rePresented, we may expect legislation like a and until we have a full rePresentation of all the interests of this country I do not look to equal legislation. I shall vote against this section, because I think it is a vicious system. I shall vote against the bill, because it is not equal and just in the burdens which it imposes upon the different systems of labor and the different pursuits of the people of the country.