The Arkansas advocate., 1830-04-07

tory leaders Ot the British Parliament. at the commencement of the American revolution. They, too, discovered, that the Colonies had grown great under the fostering care of the Mother Country: and must confess, while listening to the gentleman, l thought the appropri- ate reply to his argument, was to be found Iii the remark of celebrated or ator, made on that occasion: $ They have grown great in spite of your pro- tection.o
 The gentleman, in commenting on the policy of the Government, in rela- ton to the New States, has introduced to our notice certain .Nathan Dase, of Massachusetts, to whom he attributes the celebrated ordinance ef I7s?, by which he tells us, "sloueay was for ever excluded from the New States north of the Ohio." After eulogizing the wis dom of this provision, in terms of the most extrayagant praise, lie breaks forth in admiration of the greatness of Nathan Dane--and great indeed he must be, if 1t be true, as stated by the senator from Massachusetts, that "he was greater than Solon and Lycurgus, Minos, Numa, Pompilius, and all the legislators and philosophers of the world," ancient and modern. Sir, to such high authority it is certainly my duty, in becoming spirit of humility, to submit. And yet, the gentleman will pardon me, when say, that it is little unfortunate for the fame of this great legislator, that the gentleman from Missouri should have proved, that he was not the author of the ordinance of 'S7, on which the Se- nator from Massachusetts has reared so glorious monument to his name. Sir. 1 doubt not the Senator will feel some compassion for our ignorance, when tell him, that, so little are we acquaint- ed with the modern great men of New England, that until he informed us yes terday that we possessed a Solon and Lycurgus, in the person of Nathan Dane, he was only known to the South as member of a celebrated assembly. called and known by the name of the < Hartford Conyention.' In the pro- ceedings of that assembly, which l hold in my hand, (at page l9,) will be found in a few lines, the history of Nathan Dane; and little farther on, there is conclusive evidence of that ardent de-. yotion to theinterests of the New States, which it seems has given him just. claim to the title of s Father of the Vest" By the d resolution of the {" Hartford Convention" it is declared. " that 1t is expedient to attempt to make provision for restraining Congress irs the erercise ef an ,oatimited pozOer to make Nezc States, and admitting them into the Union" So much for Nathan Dane. of Beverly, Massachusetts.
 In commenting upon my views in re- lation to the public lands, the gentleman insists, that it being one of the condi- tions of the grants that these lands should be applied to ss the common be- neht of all the States, they must always remain c fund for reDenue;;" and adds, ''they must be treated as 50 much trea- s1re." Sir, the gentleman could hardly find language strong enough to convey his disapprobation of the policy which 1 had ventured to recommend to the favorable consideration of the country. And what, sir, was that policy, and what Is the difference between that gen. tleman and myself on this subject? threw out the idea, that the public lands ought not to be reserved for ever, as ssa great fund for revenues" that they ought not to be treated as "great treasure;o but, that the course of our policy should rather be directed towards the erection of New States, and building mp great and hourshing communities.
 Now, sir, will it be believed. by those who now hear me-and who listened 10 the gentleman's denunciation of my doc trines, yesterday-that book lay open before him--nay, that he held it in his hand, and read from it certain passages of his own speech, delivered to the
 House of Representatives in 1895, in which speech he himself contended for the very doctrines had advocated, and almost in the same terms. Here is the speech of the Hon. Daniel Webster, contained in the lst volume of Gales and Seaton's Register of Debates, (page 25lo delivered in the House of Repre- sentatives on the 18th January, 1895, in debate on the C,tasberland Road the very debate from which the Senator