The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-02-14

thess dependant people to make their way through the
world best they can! We cannot do more charitable
and humane act Thousands OF appropriated in
order diminish the price which it your produce
10 market and thus increase the OF the
try but when the of the unfortunate unatc ia
him from the distress which has unhspply befalen him
Think OF this and then do not bring your idea Of compe
iIon and OF diminishing the price OF the land in Wisconsin
to bear against this most phanthropc movement in
nexion with which the question of the price OF land
shsuld not even be mentioned Why. Mr. President,
every new State Of the Union makes appropriations for
the erection Of these very asyums for unatcs and hos
ptals for the sick and when wish to make general,
and give our country character throughout the world
ior pnlisnhropy gentlemen get up here and talk as II
keeping OF the price Of the public lands and the potec
ton OF the interests OF States had hoped that the
senator from Wisconsin. [Mr WALKrs.l for whom Ma
au9hier would have some regard for thoss who have
bees less fortunate in these gifts |, should teach him
humility, and make him look down with kind feelings
upon those who unfortunate in these respects Sir
had thought that bill founded upon such principles
these, and the motives which actuae being SO pure,
wArKER s% os :.
to notice The reply which the senator from Maryland
made TO myself. II understood his object, il the
same that OF the senator from Maine. Mr. HAMLlN
and that was, 10 get rid of the limitation In the bill
requiring that the lands shall not be sold at less price
than $1 23 an acre.
Mr.. HANLIN. If the senator will allow me, will
explain My object was 10 get rid OF the positive drec
ton IN the amendment that the lands shall be sold with
in three years My amendment provides only for selling
them as soon as practicable and keeping them within the
minimum price ot the government lands.
Mr.. WALKER. The argument of the senator was, in
some form other in which it presented 10 get rid
OF the limitation OF dollar and quarter acre; and
the reports Of this debate when published il made
ly, will show that to be the fact
Mr.. PEARCE The senator from Maine supposed that
il the Limitation time remained in the BILL it would
be necessary allow the lands be sold lower price
than 81 IS per The objection to that was first aug
gested by the senator from Missouri who thought that if
IL. IL. ko
restricted To that the friends OF the bill agreed said
myself hoped the Senate would not concur in the
amendment made in committee but that they would leave
the bill unfetered by Limitation as TO the time OF selling
Mr. WALKER. So thought, and it is to that my re-
marks would be applicable In regard to the other por
to say word. He says that am the last person who
should object 10 this proposition TO give TO the other
States lands within borders the Of its redu
cling the price OF State lands, for the reason that
myself have offered proposition which forty thousand
times worse in that respect than hisalludng 10 the
proposition which have offered to the Senate TO cede
the pnblic lands TO actual settlers Well sir ii is
somewhat gular that distinction cannot be be-
tween this proposition that is before the Senate and the
one which have offered. have constantly argued. and
shall still continue to do that my proposition TO cede
the public lands for the benefit OF actual settlers will in
the value Of property already held by individuals
and by the States And now for the reason:
II II is ceded Tor the benefit Of actual settlers. il does
not pass into anybody's possession until ii is actually
settled and occupied and TO use the language which
this same objection. which came from the senator from
Michigan. Mr. FELcH]-
"Why, sir the very opposite would be its effect In the
country, as in the cy not The price demanded or paid
ing but the improvements made and the bSsre dose
Now, sir, under my scheme for giving the land 10
ual settlers. whent passes into the hands OF Individuals
il passes for the purpose OF immediate improvement and
ask il you could do greater avor to the inhabitants
OF sparsey settled countries than TO give away the ad-
joining lands TO those who will settle upon them mme-
dately thereby creating the necessity for the laying out
OF roads, the building oil mills. the erection OF school
houses, and the making oil other improvements Nv.
cry one, i seems me, will see that such measure Will
increase the value OF property. sa
But this proposition that considering will pro-
duce different result You propose to vest the title to
portion Of The public lands within one Stale in another
Sateo be held by that State al its prce,o be sold
whom il pleases upon speculation in any quantity that
il pleasesto be held in dead hands unmproved, 10 the
end Of ncreasng its value by the Improvement Of the ad
acen lands and without promoting the interests of
the Stale through the productive labor that woud be con-
centraed upon the lands in these lands were given
away under the policy propose Here is the dlstnc.
ton and hope il may be by those who represent
States thus situated, and that they will not concur in
policy that is suicidal and which would 10 be an
nfracon upon the best and, what ought 10 be held, the
dearest interests OF these States.
The other view which presented was one OF political
consideration believe II to be bad policy Tor the gem
would be for State 10 be land proprietor in
another Salefor II the State in which the land Is stu.
a,ed not allowed tax that land great injustice woud
be done and IL IT be allowed TO how you going
TO get at the collection OF II Will you get at II by a
sale OF the land and vesng OF the title by sale IN the
State in which II lies II you propose any other mode
of collection, there will be conflict between the States;
and God forbid any conflicts prospect OF con.
cs between the States do trust this land will not be
thrown in bone OF contention among the States,
Mr. PEARcE. suppose the first par, OF The senator's
argument may be answered by question How IL the
prce OF one body Of land 10 be raised by giving away
another and much larger body OF land The senator
snpposes that by giving away lands to the landless the
price OF the lands will be raised. suppose that when
man get land for nothing he is not very likely To
tainly instinct Of in terest will prompt him 10 bny
what be may have for the asking do not there
lore how that idea ot the be realized
especially as the bounty land law IN likely to cheaper
the public lands much, and indeed, in great measure
stop their sale Tie is mistaken, too IN the idea that
within The limits of another State. is provided that
when State has suitable lands within lis own limits
il may select lands within the Territories oil the United
States That xcludes his conclusion.
Mr.. WALKER. That was expressly d'savowed at
the last session OF Congress- IS the ebates OF the lasi
session will show. Ii was expressly dlsavowed that the
location Of the land be confined TO the Territories.
and deny that the phraseoogy OF the bill will permit the
construction which the senator from Maryland puts
upon il. And as he an swers portion OF my argument
By asking me question, will reply 10 that question by
ask ing him another Do you propose that the States to
which you give these lands sla 70 and make improve
mcnis upon theml You propose ssch thing. You
propose hold the land, and to fund for the
States without consulting the interests OF the State in
which this land is situated Now. when propose to
give TO the actual settler who goes upon the and poughs
The SOIL makes fences builds houses and barns, and
tributes to the general wealth Of the country. think
that every person ought to be able that there il
mark ed difference in this policy and the one which you