Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1842-08-29
The Land Question.
EXTRACT FROM THE REMARKS OF MR..
TALLMADGE, AGAINST STRIKING OUT
THE LAND Distribution CLAUSE OF
THE TARIFF BILL
In SENATE, August I, 1872.

THE Tariff BILL.
In SENATE, August /, 1912.
Mr.. PRESIDENT 81 do not rise TO discuss the
general merits OF turif for revenue or protection
That question has been fully debated in these halls
for more Than quarter of II century. The whole
country is familiar with il nothing new can he
said about it and, after spending one whole week
upon the single item of cotton bnggiug, with the
thermometer at 80, ] am quite sure shall be ex
cused for not protracting the debate on the gener-
al merits of the bill. Neither will | enter upon
the question ofthe constitulionay of Tariff for
Protection. My views in favor OF protecting, in
Il proper manner, the labor Of the country are well
known; and care very little how that Protection
shall he given provided IL be given. Fortunately
for the country, we have arrived att period when
the theories OF no particular section need cnbar-
rass us. There is one thing in which we can all
ngree, namely, that we must have sufficient reve-
nne to curry on The Government; and it seems TO
be now conceded Ivy those who have been opposed
to the prottc Give policy as such, Tint we inny lay
duties on imports sufficient to provide ample rev.
enue for the economical wants of the Government,
and at the same time, by proper Discrimination
give adequate protection to the domestic industry
of the country. On this principle ARE able nj
the present time, to provide the requisite revenue
us well as give The necessary protection because
such revenue us the wants of the Government
require, will, by proper discrimination give such
protection us the interests of the country demand
That there should be such discrimination no one
can doubt. Free trade becomes an idle, aud worse
THAI idle theory, when we look AT the restrictions
which foreign nations put upon their labor and the
products Of our country. Great Britain virtually
prohibits our manufactures, aud laysa duty, ON an
average, of several hundred per ceut. on our ag
ricutural products 1t is with such nation ,hut
the advocates of free trade would have COM
pete. Put us OH equal footing, and will trust A
mercan industry aud American enterprise against
the world. But do not mock the farmers, the man
ufacturers, the merchants, ard mechanics of this
country with this fancfu theory Of free trade, us
long as other nations lay such restrictions upon
oui products and our labor
Mr.. President, it is no reason with me for srik
ing ont this distribution clause that it interlefes
with the compromise act The clause in refer
ence to that net was introduced in the land bill
with the full understanding that Congress would
remove it whenever it thought proper. Neither
this clause nor the compromise act Itself can stand
against the great interests OF the country. Either
and both must fall when they come in contact with
those interests. The clause now under consider
alton comes in conflict with the permanent settle
ment of the land question, which deem of the
utmost importance 10 the great and lending utter
ess Of The whole country. 1t ought 10 have been
settled long ago, and would have been but for the
spirit of pnriy which the Senator from Pennsy Iva
min Mr.. Buchanan) has with so much comrlacen.
cy deprecated on this OCCASION This would new
err have been a party question but for the action OF
Gen. Jackson in reference to the land BILL which
passed in 1888. 1t was not a party question then
in lis passage through this Senate. The dlsn-
guished predecessors of the Senator from Penn
sylvuua (Messrs. Dallas and Wilkins voted for
the bill as did also MIR. Dudley, of my own State
These, with others who voted in favor of it, were
of what gentlemen would call the old Democratic
school. But when General Jackson vetoed IT, it
at once became a party measure, and has heen
persevered in such ever since. His pocket veto
:, nj tI,nfi - t,nr Nxl 40 hus
been the subject OF agitation dawn to the present
time. Let the Senator from Pennsylvania, then,
look to his own friends when he wishes TO depre-
cate any spirit Of party in this measure.
1t is urged, however, that this clause lnterferes
with b. compromise act In what way, let the
ask ? Did the compromise contemplate the uld Of
revenue from lands TO supply thu necessary means
Tor the economical wants Of Government? No,
Sir It anticipated no such thing. 1t contempa
ted revenue for that purpose from Imports, and
from imports alone. The very terms Of the act
Imply this, and the history OF the times demon
strates it. When the compromise act was under
consideration in Congress the and bill had already
passed, unh was in The hands of the President
The compromise net was therefore passed in ref.
ercnce to the land bill, aud in reference TO its be-
coming law too for no one anticipated, or had
reason to anticipate, that General Jackson would
kill it by what has been not nnplly termed peck.
ct veto. 1t is in vain, then, for gentlemen 10 talk
promise act. Its spirit would lie violated if the
proceeds of the sales Of the public lands were not
distributed. Their distribution was contemplated
by the act; and II is very questionable whether
the compromise act would ever have passed but
for the previous passage through Congress OF the
land distribution bill and the expectation that il
would become law. The object was to settle on
permanent basis this great question, To give to
the States what rghtfuly belonged TO them, and
10 look TO imports for the expenses Of the
Government
The Senator from Pennsylvania, with kind of
sneer, talks OF our hanging on to tins miserable
pittance. Ii it he ouch miserable pttance, why
do gentlemen stick to il with the grasp of death
TO bring it into the Treasury? Why do they not
come manlully forward and carry out the nen-
ton Of Congress in passing the compromise act !?
Why do they not give to the States their due, and
pass such tariff as will provide ample revenue
for the economical wants OF The Government and
at the same time protect the domestic industry of
the country? Why do they stand by aud let the
country suffer while they are contendng for this
miserable pIttance? But, Mr.. President, the con-
ssIency OF these gentlemen is strkngly ustrat
ed by the fact, that while they voclerons in
denouncing every principle Of distribution, they
are ready TO cede, absolutely aud forever the pub
lie lands to the States within which they lie.
Mr. Buchanan. have contended for no such
thing.
Mr.. Tallmudge. do not say you have conten-
ded for III but say it has been openly contended
for on this floor by those with whom you nre pc =
lcally associated, and it only requires an Execu
tive bold enough to make a party measure, when
it will be sustained by the parry as such. Such is
the consistency of these gentlemen They, on
this floor, and their pursans elsewhere, contend
! ing for cession of these lands 10 the States in
which they lie, and at the same time, and in the
same breath, reproachng us for desiring to carry
out the honest intention of Congress in giving to
all The States their respective shares 10 the pro-
ceeds Can there he more iimsy apology of.
fered for their opposition to tariff which would
relieve at once the wants Of a suffering and ago.
nizing community? leave the question to be
decided bya people not only Jealous of their rights
but waichiul Of their interests.
Sir, there is another view oflhis matter worthy
OF the most deliberate consideration. The land
bill granted to the new States 100000 acres o