Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-01-19
CONGRESS..-2d SESSION
PERMANENT PROSPECTIVE PRE- EMPTIoN LAW.
DEBATE IN THE SENATE-[CosrlsuED.]
TucsGou Januaru s. 1911.

who shall nhabt and cultivate the same, and raise
log cabin thereon being the special order OF the day.
taken up.
MIR. CLAY of Alabama offered the following amend
ment, which he had nmated his intention to Otter on
Monday:
ind be it further enacted That, prior TO any entries
being made under the privileges given by this act,
proof of the settlement and improvement required by
its provisions shall be made TO the satisfaction OF the
register and receiver of the land district in which such
lands may lie, ogreeably 10 the rules which may be
prescribed by Tie Commissioner of the General Land
Office for that purpose which register and receiver
SHALL each, be entitled to receive fifty cents for his
services therein; and all assignments or transfers o!
the right of presumption by this act prior 10 the
issuance of patents. shall be null and VOID.
Mr. CLAY of Kentucky, observed that the amend
offered, so far as it went removed some Of
the objections the bill but, far he understood
it, applied only 10 new lands brought Tor the FIRST time
into market.
Mr. CLAY of Alabama said this amendment went
no further than had been stated but he had further
amendment 10 offer, which met the objection of the Sc
major.
The question being then put on the amendment, it
was agreed to.
Mr. TAPPAN proposed to amend the bill by an
amendment which declared that the settler should be
entitled TO the benefits Of the presumption right only
once.
Mr.. CLAY of Kentucky said that, agreeing he did
with the Senator from Ohio in the object to he attained
by this amendment he would inquire Of the mover
what would be lis practical operation? The bill gave
the precmption right to the settler, and as guard, de-
clarcd il should be exercised but we'll, man
would obtain his presumption land district, and
then he would 90 10 another and apply for the
right there; what evidence would the officer 10 whom
he made the application possess Of the right he had
yiouslv obtained And how would tie amendment
operate any check to mans obtaining the same
benefit second or third time? Again: man might
obtain right State Missouri, for example, and
then 90 and apply again in Indiana Illinois; what
check did the bill this amendment provide against
such an abuse? What evidence would the officer have
tina, the applicant had not obtained prior redemption,
hut his simple declaration 10 that effect, unless
there should be legislative enactment 70 meet the
case; The bill contained none: the amendments sup
piled none.
Mr. TAPPAN replied tia, il would not be possible
always to guard against frauds, frame Inv they
might. The check in this would be tar fact that
every presumption subsequent 10 the first would be ipso
faetO v"d but such would, lie pretended, be
very few.
MIR. CLAY Of Alabama also replied 10 tie objection
and among other things said that when there was any
danger Of fraud the Secretary Of the Treasury or the
Commissioner Of Public Lands would Of course require
the oath Of the applicant that he had obtained any
previous pre-cmpton.
Mr.. CLAY of Kentucky, observed that tie amount,
then, of the security this that, by possibility, the
Secretary or the Commissioner might prescribe some
check against the abuse Of the law Was this the sort
Oi " congress 10 auOnt w as ms
the guard provided by this bill against fraud: But the
Senator from Ohio, Mr.. TappanI said tia, the sccur
" would be in fact that the second pre- .enpon would
be void Well, Mr.. Clay would beg leave 10 put the
Senator a in illustration: \ gets a pre-cmp
ton grant in Ohio, and second one in Indiana aud
then ses out his Indiana grant 10 or Is, innocent
purchaser, without notice; would any gentleman pre-
tend to say that the right thus purchased hy would be
void; Nay, would it be void even in the hand Of the
grantee himself: The bill contained no declaration
al. LIZ L..
would it not do great injustice TO The innocent pnrcas
or, who ignorant, uf the original fraud and had
purchased bona fdc
Mr.. TAPPAN wished to prevent speculation by spe-
culators, by limiting the pre-empon right 10 single
tract of land. fthe Senator from Kentucky could
tell how to do il better, he should be happy hear him
MIR. CLAY. Very readily. Don't pass any such
law.
After few words from Mr.. TAPPAN, the amend.
ment adopted.
Mr. CRlTTENDEN said he had an amendment 10
propose, proviso, to The last clause, as follows
"Prorided, That no person being alien shall be
entitled TO any privilege right Of settlement or pre-
empton granted by this act except only snch as shall
previously have made due form of law the declara-
ton Of intention, required by the naturalization laws
Of the United States, TO become citizen Of the said u
States.
sind prorided further, That person shall take any
right benefit under this act, who shall make oath
before some proper officer authorized TO administer
settlement, worth much as five hundred dollars
He said he had supposed yesterday, when the Sc
mite decided that aliens should be admitted that the
Senate proceeded the suppostion, that foreigners
settling public lands Of intended 10 be-
come citizens; but il appeared 10 hin might still be
proper to require of them legal evidence of that
intention lie did not what possible objection there
could be to this.
Mr.. ANDERSON. There is no objection TO the
first part of the resolution.
to egislale on the plan proposed yester day by the
honorable Senator from Pennsylvania, Mr. Buchanan,
and not only welcome all foreigners but in our
expansive philanthropy 10 grant them privileges, rcf-
sed TO own native born citizens then, TO be sure,
there would be necessity of such provlso he had
proposed but If Congress legslated any thing like
principle Of nationality, if proposed 10 recognise any
distinction between foreigners and natives then surely
the amendment was proper and reasonable. Else,
what was there 10 prevent foreigners actually 10
form colonies in the midst of country TO avail
themselves of all the benefits extended By our laws
without the least thought intention of ever as
Stunning the responsibilities of American citizens.
There were already many foreigners of this de-
scripton in orr country; there were many mer-
chants in great cities who were ever ready and
the alert to grasp at every privilege legislation
would permit 10 them, but who were not citizens with
u.s. and never intended to be. Before he would grant
to foreigner the privilege provided by this BILL he
would record evidence of the mans intention 10 become
nate had been told that 10 all those who fled from OPP
preston in the old world we 10 grant-what
Our own lands, That was the amount of it, But
this what he not prepared to do. II had
been urged that were under obligation to do this
foreigners, because they presented their breasts
a buwark 10 guard us against the savage foe upon
our frontier When, and where, had we made foreign
breasts the bulwark ofour safety What and come
this that citizens had to the breasts offo
reigners for their projections No,no Things had
not come to that pass. The American people not
reduced low to be forced TO offer mPrcenary re-
wards to strangers and foreigners to expose their bo.
SONS as a rampant 10 defend us-against whom' Not
a gainsL world in would he seek such buwark
for protection much less against horde of naked
wages. This might do TO be used in argument it made
very pretty figure speech but he could not think
that gentlemen were quite earnest when they urged
such consideration that on tie Senate. No, no;
we wanted no such equivalent for orr lands; what we
chose grant would grant freely, and not encum-
Der il with condition Of defending agaist the In
dams on our border. All he would require sim
pie pledge of intention 10 become of ourselves 10
,b,ra bo pbt nfA tl.