The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-01-29

| Mr. BREESE spoke against the amendment,
| Mr.. ARCHER appealed to the senator from Texas to
withdraw that portion of his amendment which provided
for giving interest He thought il would be more likely
to pass without that provision.
Mr. BENTON made few remarks in opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. BADGER thought that the true course for every
senator who in favor Of giving any land at all to
the soldier to vote in favor OF the bill originally
reported by the Military Committee For, when he saw
his friend from Virgnia-who known to be opposed
to the whole bounty land system-speakng IN favor OF
amendments which were not likely to be adoped1he
was forced to to the old motto I'eo Dondos dond
erenes"he feared that the soldiers would get no land
at all
Mr. HANNEGAN would favor the amendment of the
senator from Ohio on condition that the proviso was
Mr. BUTLER was glad that they had at last got an
amendment to pay the soldiers in money and not IN land
He would give the soldier note Tor one hundred DOL
ars bearing interest The SPECTATORS could not roo
him of that while with all their estctons they could
prohibit the land from falling into the hands OF those
SPECTATORS He would give money then, and would would
move TO amend the amendment so as to give the soldier
at his discharge the sum OF $50.
| Mr. BREESE would prefer that the lands should be
given, il cost the government only twentyhree cents
acre. AS to the scrip proposed to be gwen by the
amendment of the senator from Texas, unless was made
receivable for the public lands, it will be worth compare
lively nothing.
Mi ALLEN would prefer the proposition Of the
from Texa. if he would make it optional with the
soldier to take land or money Those who resided al he
east.who had homes there-woqd take the money boun
l
would prefer the land bounty This would relieve them
from many objections which had been raised The best
restriction which they could place upon the grant would
be to give the soldier that alternative. ,
| Mr. EVANS conceived that the question III dispute
was while all would give the soldier bounty, whether
they should give that bounty land money He did not
see the necessity for the alternative suggested because,
if they gave the soldier money he could go and buy the
land he chose Nor did he any force in the OBJ
proposed Ii did seem to him that would be better for
the soldier and better for the government to give the SOL
der money.
Mr. WESTCOTT said he desired to state the grounds
upon which he voted He should vote against the amend
ment of the senator from Texas, and then against con-
curing in that of the senator from Ohio Mr. CoRwIN
with the hope that if both were rejected, the Senate
would fall back better proposition than either
He did not, he had often before declared regard the
public lands of such vital importance, as source OF rev.
enue He wonld not look to them as source OF rev.
enue He regarded the continued retention OF them oy
the United States as a nuisance II kept up standing
army of office holders He hoped the time would soon
when the settled policy Of the M SnS be
from the first his votes had shown IN favor OF 100 acres
to every volunteer and regular, and under the conditions
and s 0 He dy s IN hf sor
those RESTRICTIONS lst to protect the soldier from secu-
laon; 3D. effect the actual settlement OF the bounty
land by the soldier, when the war was over ms last
motive had not been avowsd that floor, but he
did not hesitate to say was strong inducement with
him, and he desired it to be condition. part OF the
consideration OF the grant OF the land AS TO Inc COM
soldiers of the Atlantic States, who did not desire to SET
tie the States, and those from the new States 1t
might as well be argued that the price hxed ey h law ror
way The Atlantic citizen had to go to the west or south
to examine the landshad to incur expenses to get to
them which the purchaser near them did not Inc class
of artisans who generally volunteer enlist prvates
those who if possessed of these lands will be most
likely to settle them They generally young men
who desire employment and will be given 1t IN the clear
ing up and settlement of these lands thus given them,
and will become Independent freehodes by the process
and more useful to socey than if they return IN search
OF employment to their old homes. There IS plenty OF
room the and southwest for such citizens AS
the extraordinary fuss about the public lands and ex
tnguishing the revenue from it, always made when any
measure changing the present huckserng system pro-
posed this affect any revenue TILL the war
is oyer and then, # all the lands settled were by the
soldiers, and if nobody else bought any, It would only
exhaust five years of the land revenue, for 1t IS about
$a,ooo,0oO year. But can it be supposed this law
would stop everybody else from purchasing! BY no
means. will on the contrary. increase purchases BY
others. Ii will enhance the value and increase the
price OF our, public lands; Does not their sell
emen or the prospect OF the settlement Ell ~ ,Ss
restriction from sae by the soldier for some Years after
the war, and for securiny the land TO his children and
widow because would prevent decrease OF sales
BY the United States to others Purchasers could not
look to the soldiers but must look to the United States
Mr. W. said he had looked at the House land bounty
bill, up the Senate, and on the table, and
he hoped all the amendments now proposed would oe re-
alton He had only been induced to make this expana
ton lest his vote should be misunderstood He said the
mputation against those in favor of giving bounty lands
the regulars and volunteers of seeking to clog delay
this bill to increase the army far might be suppo
see apply to himself, unjust He deemed proper
that the bounty land should be given by this BILL to show
the soldier what he to have, and 10 induce hun to
enter the service He had occasion voted against
postponing defeng the BILL and those opposed TO the
bounty lands had thus occasioned much OF the delay
on the other side
| The question was then taken upon agreeing to the
amendment OF the senator from Texas mr. RusKl and
decided in the negative, as follows
YEAS-Messrs. Allen, Archer, Achson, Aherion, Bag
by Benton, Butler, Cass Chalmers, Dix Evans fairhed
Hannegan Houston, Lewis, Mason, Niles, Rusk, Sewer,
Speight, Tumey, and Yuee-22
eron Ciey Thomas Clayton, John NJ Clayton, Corwin,
Crit,enden Davis Dayton Huntington, Jarnagin Man
gum, Miller, Morehead Pearce, Phelps, Simmons, Up
ham, Webster Westcott and Woodbridge-A
| The question then recurring upon concurring in the
amendment made in committee OF the whole,
| MIR BUTLER offered an amendment precisely similar
to that which had just been negaved with the excep
ton that the amount of treasury scrip to be gwen m the
two should be reduced from 500 to $780, and IRON
$50 to $25.
MIR BAGBY said that he would state few reasons for
the vote he about to give. He had voted against
this proposition for two reasons First he did not be-
cve that the patriotism of the people oil the country re-
oured any stimuIant induce them to engage IN tins
war In every State troops had offered Their ser
vices by thousands than could be received The difficulty
consisted in repellng the tide of patriotism, and not IN
putting il in motion. He opposed to it for another
reason He was in favor OF well arranged and digesed
system of bounes those who fought the battles OF the
country but he not in favor Of system which open
ed boundess field of speculation, Fraud and plumber
When tie bounty land bill from the House came up he
would give his support, provided the rights OF the sol
dcr were guarded against the rapaclty OF SPECTATORS
| Ne was then TAX q