The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-01-16
DEBATE m THE SENATE.
PROSPECTIVE pRErEMPTIoN BILL.
WEDNESDAY, January 8, l84l

AsOS-
WEDNESDAY, January 6, 1871.
The order Of the day being the bill to establish a
permanent prospective presumption system In favor of
settlers on the public lands who shall inhabt and cul
tivae the and raise log cabin thereon and the
question being the amendment offered by Mr.
PaENTIss, of Vermont, a substitute for the whole
bill, as follows:
aStrke out all after the enactfng clause, and insert
the following: That every actual settler any ofthe
public lands to which the Indian title has been extn-
guished except such as are hereinafter reserved be-
ing the head Of family over tweny-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 to compton in the purchase OF the land
50 settled upon not exceeding quarter section, at
the minimum price now established by law"
Mr. TAPPAN, OF Ohio, first offered, by consent,
the following amendment:
"And propided further, That no person, being the
owner of land in any State Territory, who shall
quit or abandon his residence his own land to re-
side on public land in the State or Territory,
shall acquire any right of presumption under this act
Mr.. 1NORVELL expressed himself as opposed to
the amendment and demanded that the question on
it be taken by yeas and nays
Mr. BENTON madesa few remarks inaudble to
the Reporter but believed 70 have been ia favor of the
amendment. ts 49,
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 a section Of new land was at
tached to the State of Missouri its northern Dor
der who held large property 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 OF the law
Its benecent object was to secure home to the poor
man who had none, and not to hold out enc urage-
ments to the wealthy to remove upon the public 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 certain-itwas impossible to restrain the
people of the w est from going on the public lands
Gentlemen might al well attemptto stopthe course Of
the rivers or the winds. The law in fact was dead
letter and must 80 remain whether pre-enption laws
were passed or not II was not to be sure, matter
Of entire indifference for there settlers who
did not wish to violate any law OF the landi but,
whether such laws were passed or not, there were
those who would enter the public domain. The
whole force of the United States, were it ten times
greater than it is, could never prevent it. Why not,
them pass general presumption law, and provide iof
the case as it existed2 The laws restraining settle
ment could not be enforced. They never had been
and Mr.. L. thanked God that they had not. But, II
Congress should refuse apre-emption law, what would
be the practical resut2 The neighbors who had made
their settlement would come together with their res
on the day of public SALE and the peculaor VINO was
there for the purpose of buying their farms over their
heads, would receive very ineligible intmalon that
his absence would be more agreeable than his compa-
nv; 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
eyen reoired to swear that be had not removed from
settled home 10 come on the public land but in how
MANY various shapes would such an oath be evaded
Still if the mover would so modify the amendment as
to require the oath as security Mr. L. was ready to
vote for it.
Mr.. FULTON, Of Arkansas, said that he was a
representative Of the log cabin interest and it was
their policy to improve every foot of the public land as
fast as possible. When the object OF the bill was to
enable the hardy pioneer to get his little farm at some
two or three lower than if ne purchased
Fat the public SALE could it possibly be an object with
the Senate to prevent him And, supposing man
had made one improvement, was that any reason he
should be prevented from making another2 Hemight
have earned home for himself was that any rea.
son he might not wish to obtain another for his son
The question being put on Mr.. TAPPANs amend
ment, it was adopted by yeas and nays, as follows
Yeas 26, nays 10.
The question then recurring on the substitute fol
the bill proposed by Mr.. PRENTIss, of Vermont
Mr,SEVlER demanded the yeas and nays; which
were ordered
Mr.. PRENTISS then went into brief explana
ton of the amendment which, from the eebleness o.
his voice. but partially heard by the Reporter He
was understood as Directing to the bill before the Sen
ate being both prospective and applying to lands
surveyed and unsurveyed AS it held out an invita-
ton not only to our own citizens but to aliens from
every land to come and settle without any condition
its effect would be to make the public lands objec
OF general scramble. When former presumption bills
passed. they always required the lands to have been
first surveyed and never before had been proposed
10 make them prospectivein their operation. The evils
that must follow were inconceivable Tho bill went
in fact to supcrsede the whole land system 1t was
totally new and untried experiment such one the
Government never had sanctioned, and he hopet
never would The whole presumption policy was o
very doubtful expediency even when made RETROSPECT
tive in its operation But this bill proposed an entire
new. and, in Mr.. Pa apprehension, dangerous
scheme and one utterly opposed to the true Interests
Of the country Mr.. p. had moved substitute b,
wav of test of the intentions Of the Senate.
Mr.. CLAY, Of Kentucky, now rose and addresse,
the Senate nearly as follows:
The amendment now offered by my friend from
Vermont by drawing line between the Legislation
heretofore pursued with relation to pre-emPtlons ant
the new comprehensive, and intermlnaoe Legislation
proposed by the present BILL opens the whole question
for discussion; and l avail myself OF the opportunll
thus afforded TO present to the Senate some oil IN
general views have taken of this subject ana lnVi's
IN the outset the serious, and, would say the soem
attention of the Senate to the bill betoret beor'
however, proceed to examine its provisions, aio'
me- in passing to notice most novel and surprIsln
doctrine advanced Yesterday Ivy the Senator from Ne'
York (Mr WRIGHT; , not that purpose to discuss
nj this time the position he assumed but that ma
here enter my public protest against it, lest should
remain silent il might be thought by any that yiel
INV assent 10 H. The Senator'S position is, that it
competent to State, under the Constitution to adm
an unnaturaized foreigner to vote In our elections