Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1850-07-06

these na clause which provides the
ZION Of States into the Union. The object Of these two
provisions Of the constitutions and the powers exercised
under them, entirely diff, and distinct. The pro-
vides for the admission of States and the other for the
sposal Of the public domain. Both being provided for in
different articles of the instrument, you no
dispose Of the public lands under the clause for the admission
of States than you can admit States under the
clause providing for the disposal of public lands When
you shall have admitted California into The Union under the
provision of the constitution pertaining to that subject 1t will
be entirely competent for Congress dispose of the public
lands within her limits obedience to the other clause
which have referred. But the Senator from Louisiana has
cited the fact that the ordinance of 1857 extended
the State of Tennessee while territory, evidence that
there compact with the people of that State reseriDg
the public lands the United States True the ordinance
extended to that Territory, but how By compact By an
agreement with the people of Tennessee Not at all 1t
done by the Of Congress which hold my hand and have
read the Senate There compacno agreement The
people of Tennessee assented the ordinance and
invited expected to assent it, Il was
adopted by Congress as approved form of Territorial
Government 1t had Just the force of ordinary act
OF Congress, and The remarks true the
adoption of the ordinance in Alabama and Mississippi
Congress did not propose to them compact and the
people did not accept Of its and conditions had the
force Of law, because it of Congress- but ceased to
exist when those Territories erected State Governments and
were received into the Union.
But, the Senator from Louisiana has fallen into another
regard to that ordinance He seems to DO under the
impression that was compact between the United States
assented and adopted by both parties Ii true that the
ordinance purports upon its face be compact but was
never submitted to the people of those States and Territories
for ratification 1t was adopted by the people Of Ohio
Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin, or either Of them
Congress prescribed to them the charter of their Terri
tora Governments, and they acquiesced 10 it, during their
Territorial condition. the they did in all other Of
Congress And if any portion Of that ordinance can be sup
posed be in rce now since the admission those States
into the Union, certainly have no more effect upon
those States than the third section of this bill will have upon
the State Of California Both to the United States all
control the public domain, free from olestaon or tag
alton by those States If therefore, the ordinance which
had other validity than the fact of having been adopted by
Congress- sufficient protect the rights of the United
States within the limits Of those States without having been
accepted by them, surely the third section of this BILL which
emanates from the same authority and embraces the
provisions, will be sufficient to produce the results in
California Alabama has also been referred TO- as having
entered into compact with the United States reference
the public lands in addition TO the ordinance That very
true, and read The terms OF TO the Senate the other
day. Is TO be found in the act Of Congress authorizing the
people of the Territory of Alabama form constitutions
and into the Union. But sir, the Senator from Lou
isiana entirely mistaken the and object of that
compact The terms were not proposed by Congress,
conditions, upon the acceptance of which Alabama be
admitted into the Union be excluded if she rejected
them Her admission not made dependant upon the
acceptance OF those propositions The first section Of The
provided for her admission into the Union additionally,
upon equal footing with the original States in all respects
whatsoever Then the sixth section submitted certain propo
sitons to the stat for her free acceptance rejection
she accepted them, she in the Union and if she re-
jeced them, still she in the Union
Here Mr. DouGLAs read the sixth section of the act 10 the
Senate /
The only effect of the rejection of these propositions would
have been that Alabama would have forfeited her rights TO the
sixteenth section for schools, the two townships semi
nary of learning, and the five per the sales Of the
public lands for education and internal improvements and the
other donations provided for in the compact Her admission
into the Union did not depend therefore, in any degree upon
her acceptance of these terms
The Senator from Louisiana has unconscousy fallen into
the same mistake in regard the ccnpacs with other States
With the exception OF Louisiana and Mississippi, which
fully explained the other day. of them required
be assened TO conditions of admission but simply as the
terms upon which they could receive their school lands and
the other donations usually made States In regard
to Florida and Iowa. have only remark that by reference
TO the act of the Sd of March, s45 which hold in my
hand will be that these States admitted without
any compact whatever in reference the pubclands OBJ
econs made to the boundaries of Iowa. and she was
required to change them, condition her admission and
this dispute about the boundaries kept her the Union
nearly years The usual grants Of land and other dona
tons subsequently made each Of those States and
Iowa entered into the usual compac' while Florida has
done to this day. repeat, therefore, that the history
our legislation upon this subject stands precisely present.
ed to the Senate the other day. t%
Now, few words about the mines. The Senator com
plains that did understand the effect of his amendment
in reference 10 the mines He that bis amendment does
not propose to the United States the ownership Of
the mineral lands but merely retain the control Of them
Now what is his argument II is that the mines do not
belong to the United States that under the Spanish laws
they vested in individuals that they have become pri
property that the United States have power
them than they have the domc Of any private
citizen of the United States resident in the country Sir if
that be the case, let ask what right have to
from California the privilege Of controlling and regulating
private property within her limits You have no more
right to do that than you have the privilege
trolling the FARMS sorehouses workshops and other property
in the other States in the Union you make that
ton in relation to private property with the view of taxing
for the benefit Of the United States, you will deprive the
State Of California of the chief of revenue for the sup
port of her State Government If those mines are public
property, as apPrehend they are you have right
them and collect the for the benefit the United States
But they were private property, the Senator from
Louisiana insists they have passed beyond the control of
this Government, and become the rghtful subject of
ton by the State of California much any other spe-
ces of private property within her limits. Have you the
power, much less the will make this unjust and odous
between California and all the other States of
the Union When she admitted she into the
Union on equal footing with the original States in all
specs whatsoever. The United States held and leased
extensive mineral lands in Illinois, Missouri Iowa, Wis
consin and Michigan The people of those States have had
ample experience in this system Of leasing the public lands
1t found be injurious and runous the country where
the mines situated without yielding dollar Of revenue
to the Government after deayiDg the expenses Of keeping
up the system. The representatives of those States made
upon this policy until last the Government abandoned
and brought the mineral lands market and sold them
other lands. Did the United States attempt retain any
control these mines after they had thus become private
property Certainly not. The moment the title Of the Uni
ted States Invested they placed upon footing with
ton. They constitute of the from which the
States derive their revenue deayng the of their