The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-12-24

ferng to the Appropriation read The Secretary accord
ngly read the following passage from the act OF ls4l,
section 3.
"And there shall be- and hereby is granted each
State that shall be hereafter admitted into the Union, upon
such admission, so much land including SnGh qtan-
~ may have been granted such State before us adj
mission and while under Territorial governments for the
purposes Of internal improvement aforesaid shah make
hive hundred thousand acres OF land 10 be selected and To-
Gated 5 resaid."
From this clause OF the act Of 1871 he proceeded, it
would be that the grant w made expressly Tor the
purpose of internal improvement; and II was admitted
that by the constitution OF Iowa, the grant diverted
from IFS original purpose Now, he would admit that the
very proper one in itself He admitted that the dfu
sion of intelligence and provision for general educanon
was very proper and commendabe care OF Legislation
and If the specific appropriations which had been made
Ito them for the OF schools was insufficient, ne
would readily vote in favor of distinct appro-
priation OF half million or million OF acres more,
by Congress, for the purposes OF education But
he not willing that a special grant by Con-
gress should be diverted from the purpose for which
il was originally intended in the manner which was now
proposed lie for insisting upon the proper eXecu-
uon OF the trust Ii was the design OF Congress III thus
setting apart portion OF the public lands for each new
State that the proceeds thereof should be applied 10 the
construction Of roads and the improvement OF rivers aud
harbors with view of creating facilities TO settlement
and commerce TO the extent 10 which It's proprietary IN
teres in the lands of the States rendered connbu-
ton to those purposes proper What would be the con
sequence of the proposed diversion OF the grant Di-
Fecy alter getting possession OF the grant the State
would be making continual applications TO Congress for
appropriations for the very purpose TO which Congress
originally appropriated this land He was unwilling
therefore, to yield his assent, humble as it was to the
Mr. WOODBRIDGE conceived that there was much
foundation for the remarks OF thu gentleman from For
da This grant was not made BY Congress without CON
sldeTatOn The country possessed large tracts OF pub
lie lands, and Congress thought that appropriation OF
this kind would have an immediate and powerful tendon
cy improve the value, and consequently raise the price
OF these lands, This motive induced Congress TO make
the grant Now, they prepared to divert the grant
from that original purpose A question at
to the competency OF the grantee to effect diversion
like that How trust could thus be diverted did not
come within his province TO decide but he held that
State not competent to divert trust from the pur
poses for which it was designed.
Mr.. ASHLEY was highly grahed 10 that Iowa
was about TO dispose OF the public lands in the manner
proposed So far as his observation went, he be-
eved that funds appropriated to the purpose OF internal
improvement in States had generally been anything
but blessing to these States. New States in
situation TO use an appropriation OF that kind properly
They almost necessarily squandered the whole capital at
He could not persuade himself that any very great
advantage would be derived by the people OF Iowa from
the proceeds OF the grant applied to the purposes Of IN
ternal improvement Poserlty would certainly be bene
fitted but very little. But here provision by which
the interest of the fund would be set apart for the good
OF the inhabitants OF the State all time to come-fo the
education of the whole OF the people. In order
have made appropriate disposition of the public lands
Congress should first have known what the peculiar
situation OF that State But what had been the expert
of States regard TO appropriations for inter
nal Improvements? How lar had "A lew thousand acres
of land been found 20 towards bringing about these
improvements How lar in Indiana How far in many
other States which he might mention! Why the inter
nal Improvements hardly commenced with these APP
preparations. The money was almost thrown away.
He would ask for the yeas and nays on the question for
the purpose OF obtaining the sentiments OF the Senate
Mr. IULEE said that he did not propose any amend
ment TO the constitution of Iowa He only desired sim
pie amendment the bill for the admission of that State
which might then go back 10 the House and receive their
concurrence If it concurred There the matter would
end. Nor was he willing that the true value of the
grant should be lost sight OF Admitting that the land
ba spl at tVVn ppra hal ,f
acres would yield million OF dollars and this amount
ought TO pay for all necessary Improvements of harbos
and rivers in Iowa 1t was the full contribution OF the
government for the purposes and he could
for suffering IT 10 be diverted.
Mr.. BREESE thought that the passage of this bill
would show, without any other act on the part OF Con-
gress, that they assent 10 the proposed diversion
Mr.. ASHLEY believed that the gentleman from Flori-
da was mistaken IN one particular. He had supposed
that the amendment might 90 to the House of Representa-
tves and receive their concurrence without any trouble.
He would inform the gentleman that this very question
was brought forward in bold relief in the House, and
there fully discussed; and he apprehended that if the
Senate made this amendment it would be rejected by the
House. For this reason, if there other, he
should strongly oppose the amendment.
Mr.. WESTCOTT was in favor OF giving Iowa ex-
pessy the right to appropriate this fund the purposes
of education instead of internal improvement, and said
he took occasion 10 urge the importance of this point be-
fore the committee But no such express authority
deemed necessary He thought that appropriation
the purpose of internal Improvement liable be
Observation-Disclosures, by spectators and pol
their private interests. An education fund.- how
ever would afford such facilities for the advancement
OF private interests. He conceived that the legislature
had done wisely therefore, appropatng the grant to
the purposes OF education
Mr. YULEE did not think that the action of the House
was be considered material point But he repeated
that the present inhabitants OF Iowa had right to d.
vert the Appropriation made by Congress from the pu
pose to which originally designed The grant
made not for the benefit OF the present population of that
State merely, but with reference also to the good of those
who to follow them in the settlement of the State
Mr. WESTCOTT repeated that he opposed to the
Appropriation OF public lands to the purpose Of internal
ua States themselves He would not give his own State
if he had the power to-morrow-and he feared not to
-a million acres OF public land and restrict its APP
pGcaon to internal Improvements
The question was then taken upon the adoption of the
amendment proposed by Mr. YULEE; and it was decided
in the negative as follows:
YEAS-Messrs Woodbridgesand Yuee-2
NAYS-Messrs. Archer, Ashley, Achson, Aherton,
Badger Bagby Barrow, Benton, Bcrrcn Breesc Bright
NJ. Clayton, CorWn, Crlttenden, Davis, Dickinson Dix
Evans, Greene Houston, Janagn Johnson, OF Maryland
Johnson, of louisiana Lewis Mangum Morehead, Niles
Rusk, Scmpc, SEWER, Speght, Surgeon Turney Upham
and Westcott--i0
The bill was then ordered to third reading and was
by unanimous consent, read third time and passed.
PRIVATE BILLS.
Mr. BAGBY (on leave) introduced Joint resolution
explanatory of act for the relief of Mary Ann Linton
which was read twice. and referred to the Committee on
Pensions.
Mr. JOHNSON of Louisiana, from the Committee on
Pensions, to whom referred the bill for the relief of
Joseph Morrison, reported the same without amend
ment.
Mr. j. also, from the same committee, to whom was
the bill the relief John Clark