The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-01-14
DEBATE in THE SENATE.
PROSPECTIVE PRE-EMPTION BILL.
WEDNESDAY, January 6, lS4l.
dec 22-2aw3w


The order of the day being the bill to establish
permanent prospective presumption system in favor of
settlers on the public lands who shall nhab and cul
tivate the and raise log cabin thereon and the
question being on the amendment offered by Mr.
PRENTIss of Vermont as substitute for the whole
bill, as follows
Strike out all after the enactng clause, and insert
the following That every actual settler on any OF the
public lands to which the Indian title has been extn
gushed except such hereinafter reserved, be-
ing the head of family, twenty-one years OF
age, who was in possession and house-keeper, by
personal residence thereon at the time OF the passing
of this act and for four months next preceding shall
be entitled presumption in the purchase of the land
settled upon not exceeding one quarter section, at
the minimum price now established by law.
Mr. TAPPAN, Of Ohio first offered, by consent,
the following amendment
And provided further, That no person. being the
owner Of land in any State or Territory who shall
quit or abandon his residence on his own land to re-
side on public land in the State or Territory,
shall acquire any right of preempton under this act
Mr. NORVELL expressed himself as opposed to
the amendment and demanded that the question on
il be taken by yeas and nays.
Mr. BENTON made few remarks inaudlble to
the Reporter but believed to have been ia favor Of the
amendment.
Mr. LINN approved the object of the amendment
and thought he should for it but believed there
would be great practical difficulty in carryingit out
He stated that when section Of new land was at
ached to the State of Missouri on its northern bor
der men who held large properly in the more settled
portion Of the State abandoned it, and went to settle
in this new district that they might obtain pre-emp,
tons Such had never been the intention ofthe law.
IT. benefcent object to home to the poor
man who had none, and not to hold out encourage
ments to the wealthy to remove upon the pubic lands
The difficulty would be in carrying out the amend
ments and Mr. l.. wished for no law that could not be
carried out. Whatever gentlemen might say one
thing was certaln-lt was impossible to restrain the
people of the West from going on the public lands
Gentlemen might well attempt TO stop the course of
the rivers the winds The law, in fact was dead
letter, and must remain whether presumption laws
passed not. IL was not, to be sure, matter
of entire indifference, for there settlers who
did not wish 10 violate any law of the land but,
whether such laws were passed or not, there were
those who would enter on the public domain. The
whole force of the United States it ten times
greater than it is could prevent it, Why not,
then pass general pre- empton law, and provide for
the case as il existed The laws restraining settle
mcnt could not be enforced They never had been,
and Mr.. l.. thanked God that they had not But, if
Congress should refuse pre-empon law, what would
be the practical result The neighbors who had made
their settlement would come together with their rifles
on the day Of public sale, and the specuator who was
there for the purpose of buying their farms their
heads would receive very ineligible intimaon that
his absence would be more agreeable than his compa-
ny and such notice to quit was in every case very
promptly obeyed He thought, therefore, that the
amendment would be imperative. A man might be
even required to that he had removed from
settled home TO come on the public land, but in how
many various shapes would such an oath be evaded Z
Still, if the mover would modify the amendment as
to require the oath security, Mr. l.. was ready to
vote for Ii.
| Mr.. FULTON, of Arkansas said that he was a
representative of the log cabin interest and il was
their policy improve every foot Of the public land
fast possible When the object of the bill was to
enable the hardy pioneer TO get his little farm
two three cents lower than if he purchased
it at the public sale could il possibly be object with
the Senate to prevent him And, supposing man
had made one improvement, that any reason he
should be prevented from making another He might
have earned one home for himself was that any rca-
he might not wish to obtain another for his
The question being put on Mr., TAPPANs amend
ment, it was adopted by yeas and nays follows .
Yeas %, nays1S
The question then recurring on the substitute for
the bill proposed by Mr.. PRENTiss Of Vermont
Mr. SEWER demanded the yeas and nays; which
were ordered.
Mr. PRENIISS then went into brief explana-
ton Of the amendment which, from the feebleness of
his voice. but partially heard by the Reporter He
understood Directing to the bill before the SEN
ate being both prospective and applying to lands
surveyed and unsurveycd. As it held out an invita-