Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1850-06-29

i,ai.I ut the useful domain or any portion Of it. No
thing at all This Government may well hold the lands
in California any individual in the United States The
only difference is this that the Government Of the United
States holds the land only for great purposehais to
SELL It holds in trust to sell for the benefit Of the Govern
ment and people Of the United States and every
Sold falls under the dominion Of the municipal sove-
reign and subject to all the rules and regulations prescribed
by the local government. The only exception is this that,
regard the lands of the United States that established
by law which, regard to individuals might be established
by contract and that is that to certain PERIOD for
certain tme those lands thus the property of the United
States shall be far excluded from the municipal sovereign
y under which they placed that they shall not be sub
taxation, or being owned by nonesidens they shall
be taxed higher than owned by residents That the
only exception and is competent to be made between
an individual and the State where the land lies be
imposed by act of Congress.
Sir, there many instances of States holding lands
within the sphere Of their government and without the
sphere of their government think understand that
with al her sovereignty, the State of New Jersey never
sessed any public domain, authority uDgranted lands
All fell in that State, believe into the possession of the
original popetors and so happened in great portion Of
New York Massachusetts claimed, and her title
knowledged to- great portion of the western part of New
York. They sold to Messrs Gorham and Phelps, and
they sold to the Holland Land Company and thus
third of her State perhaps was held by individuals corpo
raons That supposed to be any infringement
the rights Of sovereignty Of New York The thing
happened in other States. a
Now the question Of sovereignty this case or its effects
by implication, the public domain, is one that has been
thoroughly considered and clearly and fully decided. The
history Of the laws and usages Of the country this parcu
lar have been fully developed by the honorable member from
Illinois and will not go the track he has odden.
He has shown the presidents taken together he all way
There may be exceptions here and there but the general
idea has been, in the creation Of State that her admission
State has effect at all the property Of the United
States lying within its limits But sir, it is hardly worth
while for me- in this state of the atmosphere to argue this
point much LENGTH is settled and decided by the high
of
The will be found in 3dHoward. The judgment in
that pronounced by of the gentlemen whom
referred having given opinion quite the other way
when he member of Congress- Now, sir, the Su-
preme Court Of the United States in ls45 say this ex-
GLIDING all idea that the title the lands depends on any con-
tract made with the new State:
"We therefore, think the United States hold the public
lands within the States by force OF the deeds Of cesson
and the statutes connected with them and by municipal
sovereignty which be supposed they possess have
reserved by compact with the States for that particular
shows that such be exercised by the United
States witha State Such power is only repugnan
the constitution but inconsistent with the spirit and in
enon of the deeds of cession The argument much
lied by the counsel for the plaintiffs that the agreement of
the people nhabtng the States that they forever dis
claim all right and title to the unapproprated lands
lying within the said territory, and that the shall be and
remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States
cannot operate contract between the parties but bind
ing as law Full power is given to Congress to make all
needul rules and regulations respecting the territory other
property Of the United States This authorized the passage
the public lands and provide for their SALE and pro-
tect them from taxation.
"And all constitutional laws are binding on the people, in
the States and the old whether they be
bound by them Every constitutional of Congress
is passed by the will OF the people Of the United Sates
pressed through their the of
the passed supreme law
the land and operates by its own force the
ter, in whatever State Territory may happen be- The
proposition therefore, that such law upon the
Of its enactment without the express
of the people Of the new State where may happen be-
contains its refuaon, and requires further exami-
nation" @>
Therefore, sir while that decision Of the Supreme Court
stands the authority of the United States over the lands w.
ing in the States is based the law Of Congress Now
the argument of the honorable member from Louisiana is
that this being condition. the assent of the other party
side, or the entering into compact is Indispensable But
this decision OF the Supreme Court precisely and exactly
oveules all that any honorable member will see. If it
had happened that the words in this bill reservation,
being understood his argument would have lost even
its apparent force But it is enough say that has been
decided directly and distinctly every point that the au
hory Of the United States does far extend by force
ITSELF propria rige to exempt the public lands from
ton, when States created the territory in
which the lands lie. Then, sir, what has become Of all this
danger to the public lands compact would make our
title no better It is good enough without il, and1 no
compact The language of the decision is explicit; and
therefore think the member from Illinois entirely right
when he proposed the law which he ddthe for the ad
mission OF all reference the idea Of COM
pact and the Sd section of this bill drafted to satisfy doubts
Exceptions had been taken and 1t was thought this section
would satisfy and remove those exceptions 1t ntrodu
ced for that audabe and proper purpose but it stands
codng to the decision to whch have referred just well
without the Sd section with it. What is there
turn the whole current of history What is there to
show, in this case, that California has any intention of claim
ing the ownership the public lands Of her
State sovereignty Why, far from that the constitution of
California acknowledges the right of the United States those
lands II the 9th article provide how those lands
which may be granted them by the United States shall be
disposed OF and taken OF by her Legislature Is
that an express admission that the public lands within her
territory belong to the United States We proceed
cordlng to, or must regard the established precedent
this case and any thing be established by aw-if any
thing be settled by the experience of the Government in the
course OF the various admissions Of States nearly half of all
the existing States in the Unon-f any thing
tied by the solemn decision of the Of highest udicaure
in the country, it is that such thing implication Of
control over the public lands of the United States
from the creation OF State founded any idea that the
public domain necessarily aheres State sovereignty. Such
notion has never prevailed in the councils of the country
Now, sir really hope the honorable member from Lous-
ana Will reconsider the subject that be will look at what has
been decided that in this important emergency he will
sder whether worth his while stand on tecbnicaties
and whether not rather duty conform the usages
practices Of the laws and udcaue ofhe country The honor
able member younger than of US but he will allow
to say, that very doubtful whether in his
public man, however long may be, he will arrive at
more important exigency in the affairs Of the country than
now before He has taken important part, and
cessful part in some amendments the bill. He has
compshed that which he and his friends thinks important in
respect to the territorial governments Will he not help us
to accomplish his own and higher work. Will he not
consider his objections to the admission of California
arise have 10