Mr. STEWART. Mr. President, the more I think about this resolution, the more I feel inclined to oppose it. The original resolution accepting the invitation to attend this Exhibition was passed through the Senate as rather a formal matter. It was not anticipated, and if I recollect aright, it was stated that by accepting the invitation there would be no additional expense to the Government depending upon it; but now we find that the Government of the U.S. must not only pay for the transportation of our articles to hot country, which we expected individuals to do, but the Government must build up additions to Paris, or must build ahouse to be entertained in after we are invited to the entertainment; and then if any of these articles that are taken over to Paris are disposed of there, as they must be, France proposes to get a revenue out of them. It is a mouey making job for France; a matter of aying tribute to rance on our part. Ely colleague spoke of the wonderful advantages that we ould derive from exhibiting our gold and si ver in Paris. Sir, it seems to me that we might derive more advantage by an exhibition oft em here. They know more about our gold and silverin France todaythan we do ourselves. They have sent commissioners and have made examinations and official reports with regard to Nevada, where we live. v); have no sue reports in America. It seems to me that an attempt to instruct our own people as to the resources of their own country would be quite as advantageous as this. I do not think any special advantage will be derived in that point of view; for all those countries have ha official reports of the mines of the West, while we have had none, and know nothing about them. But what makes it peculiarly galling to my'I mind is, that while we are invited to this enter tainment, at which we are to pay our own expenses to enrich France, France is insulting us by her uppet monarch on our southern borders. She is defying the Monroe doctrine. I do not believe there is any good faith in all this talk about the withdrawn of the French troops from Mexico. That will depend simply upon the question whether Na oleon will con.1 tinue to have power to keep t sin there. If Euro ean affairs shall engage him so that it will he impossible for him to continue his troops there he may withdraw them. He will only withdraw them from necessity. He has been very successful for a term of years in blinding, evading, lioodwinking, so to speak, our Government. Although we have a great man at the head of our foreign affairs, I do not think he is a match for Na oleon. He may be a match for anybody e se, as my friendfrom Indiana [Mr. LANE] suggests, but I do not think he is a match for Napoleon. I think Napoleon can very easily negotiate with him so as to keep him quiet and at the same time as his vassals or inferiors. retain his desp of m on our southern borders through all time? Whether he will remove his troops from Mexico or not deends entirely upon his European situation. e may promise to remove them now, on the eve of war in Europe, and if a war should occurrequiring all his forces there he may remove them, otherwise he is not bound by this compact. I do not see that there is any binding force compelling him to do it. Sir, Napoleon, who is threatening and menacing our free institutions, he who took part with the rebellion and mocked us in our advcrsity, now invites us a co lc who stand insulted before the world by iiiiii to come and do homage to him and pay our own expenses. I say the invitation amounts to nothing. Suppose you were invited to a gentleman’s house, and you supposed you were going to be treated as guests are usually treated, but you were an sequently advised that you must bring your own dinner, your own wine, and our own cigars, could you not with propriety ecline the invitation, particularly if you had to pay a tax on the whisky, cigars, and other viands that you might bring? Suppose you were invited to a dinner, and were then told to bring your own supplies, and that '0“ would have to pay a tax upon them, could you not with propriety decline the invitation? When we accepted the invitation to attend this Exhibition, did we expect to have all these exactions? Did we not suppose that if our artisans took their manufactured articles to be viewed at the French Exhibition they might sell them, after being introduced into the country by invitation, without havin an additional duty imposed upon them 7 Di we anticipate that we would have to erect abuilding at Paris? I thought that was a great city, with a great many houses in it; but it seems the U.S. are to build an addition to Paris in order to make an exhibition of our commodities in Europe. Sir, if we could go there on fair and equal terms, and under equal circumstances, and not have to pocket more insults than any other people eVer did, I should be glad to have our country represented there. But in the 1st place, we are compelled to pocket a whole catalogue of insults, to have our national honor insulted by Maximilian on our southern bor ders, and to have our Government deceived from time to time by the vei'iest hypocrite that ever lived and the most bitter foe oi republican institutions that has ever disgraced the earth. The man who, when he thought republican institutions were about to be destroyed, had the heart to lend the entire power of the French empire to destroy it; a man who gave this unholy rebellion aid and comfort from the beginning; the man who had the audacity to do that; the man who has strategy enough to deceive our SecyState and continue this thing; this manlias the impudence to invite us to a feast at which we are to pay our owu expenses when we get there; and we are told that it will be impolite to decline the invitation. Sir, I propose to decline the invitation and take all the chances of being impolite. I do not think it right; I do not think it comatible with our national honor to accept sue an invitation. I think that when we visit we should visit upon e uul terms. I think we should respect the hToni'oe doctrine. I think thatour national honoriiud our national stand 'ing should be respected and our national the ories and our republican institutions acknowl edged. We should go to France on equal terms when we meet, and not meet Napoleon That is the way I feel on this subject. I do not see that we are under any obligation to build houses in France. I cannot find the warrant in the Constitution that authorizes us to build edifices in France. I am opposed to the resolution.