Iowa capitol reporter. [volume] (Iowa City, Iowa) 1841-1855, 1849-01-24
Speech Of the Hon. R. R. Harbour.

| AcAScIcu AL Tue Sen1te, WINE ms mOtlOn W;
pending to strike out the 18th section of the bill
re-organize the Board Of Public Works, which pr,
vided for the issuing of bonds by said Board to
amount not exceeding the money on hand and or
dollar for every of unsold land contained in ii
Des Moines river grant.
| Mn. PREsrDENr-Telieving that thi
discussion has been already protracted to
long to render any thing that might sa
interesting, l had not intended to lroubl
the Senate with any additional remark
upon this subject. But the extraordinar,
Van Buren, 7Mr. WrieLl] as wei, we'Il i as
consciousness of the responsibility tina
must rest upon me as the Representative,
OF a district deeply interested in this ques
ton, impel me to ask the indulgence o
the Senate, that l may attempt reply t,
his arguments, and offer few additiona
reasons why believe the motion 10 strik,
out the 10Th section Of the bill should pre-
vail. r.
The gentleman from Van Buren, Mr.
Wright) takes the broad ground that ,her.
is unconstitutional objection to The passage
OF this bill as it now stands, and also con.
tends that the interest of the State demands
Its passage. beg leave to call the atten.
ton of the gentleman to that clause of our
constitution which says, that "the Gene
raj Assembly shall not in any manner Gre
ate any debt or debts, liability or liabili-
lies, which shall singly or in the aggre-
gate with any previous debts or liabilities
exceed the sum of one hundred thousand
dollars" Now, sir, our present debt and
Liabilities exceed the sum of eighty thou
sand dollars. Then, ask, if we have the
power under this clause to authorize an
unlimited issue OF bonds, for the redemp-
ton Of which the State is morally, honor
ably, and legally bound ? This clause of
the constitution which have quoted is
plain the effect of the passage OF this bill
which authorizes the Board of Public
works to issue bonds, not exceeding in
amount all the land contained in this grant
at one dollar per acre, and the money on
hand, would be, as can be seen by all. a
direct violation OF the spirit if not the let
ter Of the constitution. l unhestatingly
assert that 1herc is not in the State good
lawyer who would not decide, were the
question presented to him, that we have
not the power to pass this bill as it now
stsnds. But the gentleman contends that
these bonds are predicated upon the faith
Of the Dcs Moines river grant, and that
the faith Of the State is only pledged that
these lands shall be applied 70 the pay
meut Of these bonds when they become
due. This, sir, is distinction in form,
but not in substance. And | am not a
little surprised that gentleman of his
(Mr. Wright's) legal reputation, should
attempt TO obviate constitutional obiec-
ton upon such slender grounds. II we
authorize our agents to perform an act we
as State are held responsible, and are
legally bound for The consequences that may
result from that act. Hence. if we au-
thorize The Board of Public Works to ne
gotiate loan, or to issue bonds upon the
faith of these lands, or other property Of
the State, it is indebtedness and liability
against the State. No principle is better
established than this The act itself being n
guarantee that the State will see the debt
paid. But, says the gentleman, insert a
proviso that the State shall never be held
responsible for the payment Of these bonds,
Well, sir, suppose we DO, and these lands
fail TO pay the debt contracted, what is the
consequence We have authorized our
agents to contract debt but failed to pro-
vide means to pay it, hence, reputation
is the Escape goat" by which we avoid
the csponsibiEi,y Of an act which we our
selves authorized. Bit the gentleman
contends that this is anticipating a contin-
gency that can never arise from the fact
the Des Moines grant is pledged for the
redemption Of these bends. Sir, we have
as much right to pledge the gold mines Of
California, as we lave TO pledge these
lands as contemplated by this bill, from
the fact, that the moment we charge or
violate one Of the conditions upon which
we accepted that grant, we iorieit our
right to control it; and not one member on
this floor will SO far hazzard his reputa-
ton, as to assert that this policy OF hypo-
thecating these lands for loan, is not q
direct violation Of the express provisions
Of the act of Congre making the grant
to the State. The second section reads as
follows: "That the lands hereby gran
ted shall not be conveyed or disposed OF
10y said Territory or by any State to be
formed out of The same. except as said i'm
provement shall progress that is, the said
Territory or State may sell so much OF
said lands as shall produce the sum Of
thirty thousand dollars, and then the sales
cease until the Governor of said Territory
or State shall certify the fact to the Pre-
sident Of the United States, that ore hall
Of said sum has been expended upon said
! Improvement, when the said Territory or
State may sell and convey quantity o,
the residue Of said lands sufficient to re-
place the amount expended, and thus the
sales shall progress as the proceeds there
of shall be expended and the fact of sucl
expenditure shall be certified as atore.
said
Now, sir, ask any sane man, care
not what his wishes may be, or to what
party he belongs, if Withholding from sale
a portion Of these lands and hvpothecatine
the same is not violation of the section
which have just read? The language
Of this section is too plain to admit Of :
doubt as to the intention Of Congress which