Mr. MORRILL. I move to strike out the 4th section of the bill, as follows: SEC. 4. Abife: That all laws and partsoflawsnllowmg fishing bounties tovesselshere after licensed to engn c in the fisheriesbe, and the same are hereby repealed: Provided, That from and nfter the dato of the passageof thisuct, vesselsliccnsed to engagein the fishericsmaytakennboardimported salt in bond to beusedin curing fish.nnrlersuchrcg nlations as the SecyTreasury shall prescribo, nndu on proof that saidsalthus beenusedin curing fish todutieson the same shall be remitted. I do not propose to present any argument to the Senate on this question. That I attempted to do on a former occasion, and should not think of craving the indulgence of the Senate at the present time to repeat it. But there are 2 or 3 considerations to which I desire to call the attention of the Senate. In the 1st place, the subject is not a question of finance which properly falls within the jurisdiction of this committee. I do not think that it ought to have felt itself charged with such a subject. The protection of the revenue does not authorize the consideration of the question in the sense in which the committee has presented it to us, in my judgment. What is this interest with which this committee, if I may be allowed the expression, so unceremo niously deal? Why, sir, it is an interest that was established at the time the Government was established, and has uniformly been sustained and fostered since the Government had existence. It is an interest not only fostered by our Government but it is an interest that every military, naval, and commercial Government on the globe has found it necessa to foster, cherish, and sustain. There is no government in modern times that has pretended to maintain a commerce or a navy but has ado ted this policy. ow, sir although this question has been repeatedly before the Senate, the enemies of this interest never have been able to carr the judgment of the Senate with them, I be ieve, in a single instance. My recollection is, that whenever it has been referred to an appropriate committee for consideration this interest has always been sustained. When it has been considered as a measure of commerce, as a measure touching the commercial marine of the country, and the Navy of the country, it has always been sustained; and the general judgment of congresstime and again has been in favor of it. '1 ierefore I submit that an interest which has been so lur ely fostered, until it has come to be the standin policy of the country, ought not to be re ea c upon a bill of this sort. It is not that nd of legislation which I think ought to be encouraged upon sur h a bill. It is for this reason, among others that it has not received that consideration of the Senate which would justif the Senate in legislating on the subject on a ill of this character, that I make this motion. Now, Mr. President, I do not intend to disguise the fact, and I do not intend that the fact shall be disguised either, that this movement crsisted in for years, always in the South and atterly in another direction, is the result of prejudice against this interest, on the ground that this isa ounty to a local interest. nothing is further from the fact; nothing ever was further from the fact. It resulted from the broadest idea of national concern. It has been fostered and cherished and sustained uniformly upon the idea that it affected the whole country and was the interest of the whole country. Now, sir, we find a class of representatives from one section of the country going enmasse, in a body, against this measure as one of local conceru, who I allude to it in no invidious spirit, of course; I think the argument is legitimate when other interests of a local character touchin their interests are concerned, you will fin going in a body for them. If this interest is obnoxious to the charge of beinga local interest, what do you say of the appropriations which you annually make to encour age agriculture? Is that more general? Suppose I should concede it to be so, Iwill ask those gentlemen whose constitutional scruples are affected by this measure, under what provision of the Constitution those appropriations are made? Sir, the appropriation to the Bureau of Agriculture is a tribute to the agricult ural interest of the country purely. I do not object to it. When the a icultural interest of the country prospers the whole country prospers; but I say to that class of statesmen or representatives in the Senate, who find no difficulty in appropriating large sums to stimu late on interest which is a powerful and domi nant interest in their section of the country, that it does not come with very good grace from them to talk about stimulating a local interest when you are called upon to appropriate at most a few 100,000 do lars toward an interest which has had the sanction of the policy of the Government from its earliest pe riod down to the present time. I am not going to repeat what I said on this subject on another occasion. I am not going to make an argument upon it. I rose simply to arrest the attention of the Senate to this subject. It was by mere accident that I found this section in the bill. Upon this question, forbearing to trespass further upon the attention of the Senate, I ask for the yeas&nays. The yeas&nays were ordered.