State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1831-1836, 1836-05-24
LAND DISTRIBUTION pIIT-

The bill from the Senate, appropriatng
for limited time, the procee ds of sales o
public lands among the several states, com
, ing up, on its first and second reading,
I Three motions were made for commit
| ment.
, First, by Mr. Williams, of Kentucky t,
, the committee Of the whole on the state
; the Union.
) Secondly, by MIR Carr, of Indiana, to the
Committee on Public Lands.
Thirdly, by MIR Gillett, of New York, tC
; the Committee on Ways and Means.
Mr. Williams of N. G. hoped tho bill
would I've referred to the Committee on the
state of the Union. 1t was a bill requiring
prompt and speedy action. There was nc
sort of necessity to send it to one of the
+ standing committees. All the information
that could be obtained, was already in the
possession of the House ana the people.
Mr. Chambers of Penn. was i'm favor of n
: similar reference, any other disposition
would occasion delay. There were no
facts to be collected, which were not already
, known.
Mr. Grennell, of Mass, said this subject
had been before Congress for several years,
and all the great interests of the country
required that the attention of Congress
should he fixed upon it, as the attention of
the people had long been. The Committee
of the whole on the state of ihe Union,
was the committee Of all others, in which
the many weighly questions which were
involved in this bill could he best consider
ed and discussed. The Committee on
Public Lands had already put its negative
on this subject, by reporting a bill for the
graduation of the price OF the public lands.
They were therefore committed and no
new light could be expected from them.
As 10 the Committee on Ways and Means,
there was no question of finance, which it
was necessary for them to decide. All the
information on the whole subject that could
he given, had been given. lie hoped the
bill would be referred to the Committee of
the whole on the state of the Union, and
speedy action might he had upon it, so that
at least the suspense in which the people
were held might be removed.
MIR llanier was in favor of commitment
to the Committee on Ways and Means.
He could not see the subject in the light ia
which others viewed it. 1t was said there
should be no delay. Why not? The bill
was based on the principle that there was
a surplus revenue. Ought not the fact to
be first ascertained how much money would
be wanted to carry on the operations of the
Government, before we give our money
away? There might he no surplus revnue
worth talking about, or there might be Just
enough TO talk about and nothing more. |
There were questions of finance involved !
in the bill which required report from
the Committee on Ways and Means,
and there he hoped it would go. The
House could not act underStandingy, till
such report had been made.
Mr. Reynolds of Ill. thought the Bill !
ought to go to the Committee on Public
Lands He considered this the most ap- !
proprate reference. The question was
not altogether one of finance. 1t might be
found necessary to amalgamate the two
principles of graduation and distribution.
Some gentlemen might not approve of
such course, because certain political no
tons might deter them from adopting it.
Still it might be found necessary to adopt
it. He was anxious to see the subject set
tied, and he thought that Congress ought
not to adjourn without setting it, even if
they remained here until October.
Mr. Granger said: am decidedly in ia
your, Mr. Speaker, OF the motion to refer
this bill to the committee of the whole
House on the state of the Union. 1t is not
many days since we were told by lhe chair
man of the committee on the judiciary, on
bills involving some of the strongest con-
stitutional principles that could possibly
arise that, ut this stage of the session, even
he reference of important bills to the COM
nlltee of the whole, was as much as to
leclare the death warrant of those bills
and still, sir, it is urged now not only that
he denial of such reference should he
lad, but this bill should be sent to commit
ees that are pledged against the principles
Of the bill so referred to them.
What, Sir, is the design Of member to
refer bill to one of the standing commit
Tee of the House 1t is generally TO elicit
Information on subject not well under
stood. Is that the fact in relation to the
bill before You? Certainly not; for there
has been no question presented to the ma
ian tor the last ten years Of deeper inter
est to the people, or that has occupied more
Of the attention not only of the people,
but of the Representatives.
Nor is this all. 1t is fact known
by their report made to this House, and by
heir bill offered and now upon your files,
hat the committee on Public Lands is
pledged against this proposition. All then
thar ask is, that this bill may he placed in
the same position as the one that has been
reported by that committee, whose opinion
has been already expressed to this House.
How can you arrive ut such result but by
aking this bill to committee OF the whole
On the state of the Union, and making it
he special order Of the day with the same
bill ON this sabject already Oh your files,
and then let the question be decided as
argument and Judgment shall declare that
It ought to be decided? ask you, sir, if it
is the intention of this House TO meet the
question boldly, and Tor gentlemen to stand
Or fall by the reason in this case, what mr.
5ument can be afforded why, when you
have had report on this very subject, you
should not take this bill sent to us by CO.