Wisconsin herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1846-1849, 1848-06-10
NUMBER IA.


lin consequence Of what had been stated,
and for that reason, no other or different
boundary ought to be prescribed by Ccns
gress. He should therefore vote against
what was called the Rum river, or extreme
western boundary, which had been recoms
mended, alternativeiy, by the people Of
Wisconsin; also against the boundary pro-
posed by his colleague, & Mr.. Smith,) which
was not perhaps natural, but an arbitrary
boundary.
In regard to the lands heretofore granted
to the Territory or State of Wisconsin, for
purposes of internal improvement, and
which were recognized and regulated by the
constitution Of Wisconsin,, il was of little
or no consequence whether provision was
made in the lili for the deduction Of the
quantity from the grant of five hundred
Thousand acres, 10 which the State would
he entitled under the act of September 4,
lSii, or not; for that act, by a general reg
,arion, expressly required that all such spea
cial grants should he deducted from the gem
oral grant of FIVE hundred thousand acres to
each of the new States.
Upon the subject of graduation, he dea
MED the charge of the member from Con-
nectcut Mr. RockwelD that it was "gross
and outrageous measure; such denuncia-
ton could only proceed from gross mis-
conception of the merits of the measure -
MIR. Nee. was for graduation, for many
reasons; among others, because it was con-
sonant in its principles and effects to the
spirit aud genius of our constitution OF Cow
ernnent saa a
Z The Constitution certainly contemplated
that all the States, the new as well as the
old, should stand upon the same footing of
Unconstitutional sovereignty and independence.
No one would deny this as an abstract
proposition. Well, could il be true that
the new States held such footing, Ssen
they We're subject 10 an anomalous and de-
grading jurisdiction unknown to the old
Statess When this Government might
claim to Invade tho new States with pecu4
liar and arbitrary jurisdiction, to punish by
fine and imprisonment any citizen OF the
new States, as trespasser, who might tread
Ior cut twig upon the public domain--when
this Government might, in virtue of its pre-
tensions, send military force into the new
States to exclude or drive the settlers from
the public lands---could such be footing of
equality in regard TO the new States, when
such arbitrary pretensions were disayowed
in relation 10 the old Statcsf Certainly not.
The Constitution, therefore, demanded that
such policy should be adopted in relation
to the public lands as would most speedily
release the new States from their vassauge
To the Federal Government, and admit them,
in fact, TO constitutional equality.
Not only the Constitution dcmanded this
policy, but also considerations of public poll
icy Agriculture was the great and primary
interest of the country. II was essentially
n republican interest. In proportion, there
fore, as we developed and improved this
interest so we would augment national and
individual wealth, aud strengthen the repub-
lean props of the Government. BY redu-
cling the price of public lands, the circle OF
competition for their purchase would DO
extended, the lands thus brought within
the reach of the poor as well as The rich.
lmonopolies prevented, the number of free
holders increased, and the public revenues
improved.
The old States graduated the price or
their lands according to their gualites.--
Maine sold hers for some twenty-five cents
per acre, payable, perhaps, in wora upon
The high roads; Pennsylvania FOR stili
smaller price; so also Kentucky, Gsovgin,
and other States; and the pnli-y thus adopt
ed by States for local l-netit should be adopt
ed by this Government for the benefit of the
whole.
Graduation had been tried and worked
well--it was tried in Georgia, also in Ten
ncssee, in regard to the lands of this Cow
eminent: aud why should not the benefits
Of a policy approved by the States be adopt
ed by this Government Lands, like all
other properly, were Of unequal value--
some worth more, Others less, Of course;
therefore policy, justice, common honestly
required that they should be rated and sold
according 10 their different value. And
this was the whole extent of graduation.
4 H.
lmept an average Of twenty-thrce cents per
acre, including the whole expense of pur-
chasing, surveying, and selling them. Is il
lust, il it fair, therefore, that these lands
should be held by the Government for an
indefinite period for sale at 81 % per acrel
This would be aVarice, which would DO
questionable in an individual, much moro
50 IN a Government processing TO be popu-
lar and free.
But was il not strange~-evcn afirontiyc---
that the member from Connecticut should
object 10 graduation, when he and bis par
~ advocate that wasteful and agrarian meas~
fure of 'distribufiOno And what was dis
tribution; II proposed to tax the people OF
the new States unequally, as consumers, to
buy more and lands, 10 he sold chiefly to
themselves, at an advanced price, in order
that the proceeds Of such such sales might
be distributed among all the States. ltpro-
posed to divert the proceeds OF the sales Of
the public lands from the treasury to the
States; il proposed, in effect, TO squander
the land and revenue for party purposes
Was not such policy most obnoxious and
dangerousl
The m,tnber from Vermont (Mr. Cola
mer) had undertaken, the other day, to CEN.
sure what he considered H. faithlessness Of
granting boundaries Of land to soldiers for
services 10 past wars, iDasmueh as the .'sales
of he pubIic lands, not the lands, had been