human knowledge. The general object of this bequest-of which we are constituted the trustee-is described to be the "increase and diffusion of knowledge among men." Now, if we were to have a library at all to carry out this great object, it really seemed to him that that library ought to be coextensive with the limits of human knowledge. Some of his honorable friends on both sides of the House, had dropped observations in the course of this debate-and he had heard them with surprise-which would seem to imply that moral science is not knowledge, and that nothing but what are regarded as the natural sciences-astronomy, mathematics, and others of that class-is knowledge. The great field of modern inquiry relating to the moral and political sciences is not to be considered at all as a branch of human knowledge! Was this so? And was this the country, or this the age, in which we were to recognize such a doctrine? It did seem to him that the most important of all the branches of human knowledge is that which relates to the moral and political relations of man. It is intimately connected with the rights, and duties, and privileges of citizens, whether in public or in private life. How would gentlemen designate that great branch of human science, which is of very modern origin, and even now in its infancy-political economy? Is it not a most important part of human knowledge? And are the legislators of this country, who are so deeply concerned in the destinies and progressive civilization of the human race, to regard the science of government and legislation as no part of human knowledge? It really seemed to him that, as representatives of the American people, they could recognize no such distinction. We have been told from high classical authority that " the proper study of mankind is man;" but here the idea upon which the original form of this bill seemed to stand was, that the proper study of mankind is that of animals, exotics, and plants only-not including at all the great moral and civil relations of man. Now, he took it upon himself to say that, if gentlemen would survey the field of moral science, they would find that it embraced a much larger portion of knowledge than the physical sciences, however important they may be.

The honorable and venerable member from Ohio, as he had been styled, [Mr. Tappan,] based his leading arguments upon the necessity of making that institution a counterpart of the Jardin des Plantes, in Paris, where there were great collections of material elucidating natural history; but let him tell the honorable Senator that that institution was sustained at a very great expense, and yet it afforded but a very

limited source of improvement for the increase and diffusion of knowledge in its liberal sense. Was there no other institution in Paris than the Jardin des Plantes, which could be taken as a model? He would refer the honorable Senator to another institution, and one which would better fulfill the design of the bequest. Look at the wide and comprehensive body of instruction delivered at the Sorbonne, (the Faculté des Lettres et Sciences,) under the auspices of the University of France, the great fountain of knowledge to which all enlightened strangers repair, and drink in copious libations of philosophical and practical learning. He was not conversant with Mr. Smithson's peculiar tastes or habits; but if he (Mr. S.) was the man of liberal and general inquiry that he believed him to have been, he would venture to assert that his resort was as much to the Sorbonne as to the Jardin des Plantes. And what would he hear there? Would he not hear lectures on the sciences of history, moral philosophy, and government, as well as physics, and mathematics? The present minister of France, M. Guizot, had been, if he mistook not, a lecturer on history-ancient and modern history, comprehending all the phases of human society-in this institution. Others had become known there to the world as much as lecturers, as ministers of state, worthy of being entrusted with the destinies of nations and mankind.

He would beg leave to ask the gentlemen who had charge of this great subject, in looking for a model, to look at such an institution as the Faculté des Lettres et Sciences at the Sorbonne, rather than at a special institution like the Jardin des Plantes. He had no disposition to depreciate the value of the physical sciences; but he insisted upon it, that the moral and political sciences were equally important, and, if any distinction was to be drawn, more important. At a very early period of his life, he was struck with a graphic remark make by the great commentator on English law, in illustrating the fitness of associating a professorship of law with the University of Oxford-and his honorable friend from Kentucky [Mr. Crittenden] no doubt well recollected the passage-that "the sciences are of a sociable disposition, and flourish best in the neighborhood of each other." He would make no distinction. He must be permitted to say, that he thought the Senate had already decided the question in regard to the extension of this library, by striking out the proviso of the first section, and the whole of the eighth section, which provides for professors on the subject of natural sciences only.

He saw no reason for any distinction between the moral and physical sciences. If such a library as was contemplated by the honorable Senator from Massachusetts was established, there would be no danger of the physical sciences being slighted; but he hoped that these great moral and political sciences, which so intimately concern the temporal and eternal destinies of man, would have their appropriate space in this great receptacle of human knowledge.

He had been led to these remarks because his firm and solemn conviction was, that we now have it in our power to do more good to this nation in our day and generation, by a judicious and wise application of this five hundred thousand dollars, which has been put into our hands, than by the application of the twenty-five or thirty millions we are in the habit of annually appropriating.

He was glad that it was the sense of the Senate that this subject should go back to the committee, to be matured and deliberately acted upon, and that there was to be brought forward a plan of some great and noble foundation, which would realize, to the fullest extent, the magnificent conception which suggested this donation. He was opposed to any limitations, he was opposed to any distinctions between the great branches of human knowledge. In the republic of letters all stood upon a platform of equality; and if we have a library at all, it should be co-extensive with the limits of human knowledge, and with the design of the donor "the increase and diffusion of knowledge (of all sound knowledge) among men.”

Mr. PHELPS suggested a modification of the amendment proposed by the Senator from Kentucky. It was to shape his proviso so as to say "That, in the selection of such books as were necessary to form a complete library, due regard should be had to works of science," &c.

Mr. CRITTENDEN accepted the modification.

Mr. BATES protested against any proviso which would limit the selection. It was wholly unnecessary, because no great national library could be complete without the very works alluded to.

Mr. NILES did not think it came within the purpose of the donation to establish a great national library. If the donor thought that the best way of increasing and diffusing knowledge among men, he would have enjoined the estab lishment of such a library. He was in favor of a prudent limitation with regard to that branch of the institution, and should therefore submit a motion to that effect.

The question was then taken on Mr. Crittenden's amendment, as modified, and it was rejected-ayes 15, noes 21.

Mr. NILES now moved to amend the amendment, by limiting the purchase of books to $5,000 annually.

Mr. BUCHANAN inquired if $5,000 a year was to build up a library worthy of the donor, this nation, and this age? The amendment was rejected.

The question now reverted on Mr. Choate's amendment, and it was adopted.

Mr. TAPPAN, before the motion to recommit was made, wished to test the sense of the Senate as to his original plan of adding some of the interest to the principal so as to make the fund $600,000. He therefore moved to amend the first section by adding $91,682 out of the interest due, to the original fund, so that the investment should be $600,000.

Mr. CHOATE objected to this as, in effect, cutting off the means for establishing a national library. The buildings for the institution, the enclosures of ground, and the purchase of objects of natural history, would possibly consume so much of the residue of interest as to leave little or none for founding the library, or erecting a suitable building for It might take from $150,000 to $200,000 for all these; but till details and estimates were properly investigated, it would not, in any case, be prudent to divert the management of this accumulated interest.

one.

Mr. BUCHANAN thought it was desirable, if it could be done without defeating the objects intended, to increase the capital by this addition of a part of the interest.

Mr. TAPPAN put his motion in a definite form.

Mr. SIMMONS argued that, until some plan was agreed upon as to the manner of carrying out the intention of the donor, it would be highly imprudent to make a permanent investment of means that might be wanted in the accomplishment of the object.

Mr. TAPPAN urged that $117,000 of the interest would remain, which could be as much as the managers would lay out with advantage in the first year; and for the second, they would have $36,000 on the $600,000. The $6,000 would cover the expenses of lectures and experiments, leaving annually $30,000 for collecting a library, and the other purposes required of the management.

The amendment was rejected.

Mr. MOREHEAD suggested a renewal of the amendment, making the addition $41,682, instead of $91,862, so that the

capital fund would be $550,000, bearing an interest of $33,000 a year.

After some conversational discussion on this point, it was agreed to let the proposition go, with the offered amendments, to the committee; and

On the motion of Mr. WOODBURY, the bill and amendments were recommitted to the Committee on the Library.

SENATE, January 16, 1845.

Mr. TAPPAN, from the Committee on the Library, reported the bill (S. No. 18) with an amendment; which was ordered to be printed.

SENATE, January 21, 1845.

On motion of Mr. TAPPAN, the previous orders were postponed, with a view of taking up the bill for the establishment of the Smithsonian Institution.

The bill was accordingly taken up for further consideration as in Committee of the Whole, the question being on adopting the substitute reported from the Committee on the Library, to whom had been recommitted the original bill for the purpose of having it remodeled.

This substitute provides, as the original bill did, for the investment of the principal sum received under the bequest, in the Treasury of the United States, at six per cent. interest from the date of its reception; and for placing at the disposal of the managers the accumulated and accruing interest for the purpose of carrying out the design of the donor-the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men. The outlay of the accumulated interest is to be, as directed in the first bill, upon all necessary buildings, enclosures, purchases, and application of the grounds appropriated out of the property of the United States in the Mall, heretofore described, for the objects of the institution; the business of the institution to be conducted by a board of managers, consisting of the Vice-President of the United States, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, while in office, three members of the Senate, three members of the House of Representatives, and seven other persons, not members of Congress, two of whom shall be members of the National Institute in the city of Washington, and resident in said city; the other five to be inhabitants of the States, no two from the same State. The three members of the Senate to be appointed by the presiding officer of the Senate; and the three members of the House by the Speaker of the House. In each House the respective mem