The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-12-24

bic length pointing many features in it which he pro-
nouneed evils and grea, detects
Mo RICHARDSON believed that the western mem.
the interests OF the West quite as well as
gentlemen from the older States. lie had heard the ae
cusaon of their ncompeeney 10 protect their eonsu-
eas made before yet he believed that he could safely
firm that all the members understood their duty
to their constituents well the gentleman from New
Hampshire himself He conlended that there was no
foundation for the charge that these reso uons opened
the public domain 10 Spectators 10 The great injury OF The
States in which such warrants might be located He ex-
blamed that spectators who bought such warrants with.
ont assignments their backs bought them at far LEES
price. owing TO the risk they OF failing TO get perfect
title in The end The man buying house. however,
would such risk His purpose To- settle down
and increase the value Of his purchase by lis improve
ment The speeulaor alone would take such chances
lie could reason why The government should per-
nit locations in Indiana which II would not permit in
Minnesota II Tins 10 be The permanent policy Of
the government with reference 10 these warrants. it
would only give the refuse lands TO The soldiers He
concurred with the views OF the gentleman from Florida
Mr. CABsI IN holding that the check on the location
OF these warrants had been adopted by the House with
out full knowledge OF the effect OF the vote Ii
from the Committee Ways and Means and viz
tually struggled through.
| MI. r. then called for the previous question. but he
| withdrew II for
! Mr. BAYLY, who explained that the amendmen, pre-
venting the general location OF these warrants org
nally from Mr.. Vnton. He (Mr. b. had aided that
gentleman in getting it passed He had done in order
to husband the OF the treasury. II would be
recoecled that the lime of its adoption, there
that The would De 10 Ceu
loans meet its current expenses tie had, therefore,
voted 10 confne these locations TO lands already in
ke in order not to interfere with the revenue from the
sales from the public lands lie did not know the
precise OF those sales al present. but before the
law OF 1850 passed. the amount gong into the treasury
from that source was some two millions annually.
He (Mr b. was not disposed 70 follow the example Of
Mr. Tuck in assuming to take OF western interests.
Western members, his experience taught him, were
petcnt to the discharge OF that duty.
| MIR TUCK explained He had been misunderstood He
did not design to say that the western members not,
in all respects attentive and competent to the protection OF
the rights OF their constituents but (Mr T. was under
stood to add that the policy they advocated with refer
ence to this bill would fail TO result benefciay TO the
States in which spectators might locate these Warrants
Mr.. BAYLY would let that matter pass. He was for
withdrawing the government proprieiorship OF public
lands in the States by compelling the location OF public
| Here Mr. b. explained at some length The evil effects
of permitting the government to continue to held large
For that reason, and to husband the Of the
treasury, be had felt !, 10 be his duty 10 aid Mr. Vnton
in procuring the enactment OF the proyso in the civil
and diplomatic bill OF last year, before referred to.
Mr. BiSSEL remarked that, II all the warrants so far
issued under this law had been located in Illinois. there
would still remain three or four millions Of acres OF land,
the property al the general government within it's linn
Mr. BAYLY said that that what he wanted TO do
Mr. CARTIER did not object TO this bill in order to
save the public domain. That had to go; and he hoped
ii thai il would go according the bill Of Mr.
settler Since he (Mr C) had been here the legislation
on the subject OF the public domain had been
scramble 70. the benefit OF different cques Of specua
tors The Congress had nomn:y provided for all who
had smelt powder in The OF their lives and for all
who had had grandfather who had SERVICE" In
truth the army had been canonized He might be utter
ing unpopular sentiments this question but he would
repeat all corn stalk soldiers and almost all who wished
to be consiak soldiers, had been thus provided for
Congress were not hnancierng economically. They
were throwing away all the public domain belonging
the individual citizens of the United States not.
claimed, 10 the States to the stalk soldiers This
property had been paid for by taxation, and the
privilege OF giving away also TO be paid for This
was too mach Tor him 10 stand He could not hope
stop this squanderng of the public domain yet he would
insist raising his voice against the proposition pay
for the privilege of giving these lands away. very bad
fnancierng We had taxed citizens TO purchase the
land, and now were asked absolutely to tax them in Civ
ing It away.
Here Mr. c. read the ath section Of the joint reso
lutons, 10 show that they endeavored 10 pay land
officers, in out OF office, certain fees from the gen
eal revenues of the United Siaes-no from The pro
ceeds Of the sale OF the public ands The bill provided
also pay the dead and ving,hose in Office and those
out OF office. IL was bal enough 10 tax citizens for the
purchase of the land without making them pay for the
privilege Of giving it away. lie tired Of thus pam
peIing all who had shouldered a corn stalk.
Mr.. MARSHALL, OF Kentucky moved the previous
question
Blu, Mr.. CARTIER, still claiming The ioor urged that
each warrant ISSUED cost the treasury s. He only
asked for liberty 10 try to nd the bill
Mr. JONES held that the action OF the House had
shown that there was majority for the main principles
lures, and went 10 show that embraced very objec-
tionabe clauses. Such the clause giving to the
receiver, and other land officers double fees-hTs from
Jhe soldier holder of the warrant, and then actually
from the treasury again
Mr. BfSSELL explained. holding that the bill did not
contemplate charging the soldier when locating such
WARRANTS Tor himself, surveying fees II he sells, how
ever, his assignee must pay them.
Mr. JONES (continulng) argued that when the sol.
der Sold the purchaser would deduct these fees All
this went TO show the Importance of referring the bill
a select committee. He held that the gentleman from
Virginia Mr. BAyLyl was mistaken in saying that the
provision 10 restrict the location OF these
incorporated IN the civil and diplomatic bill OF the pre-
vious session. on The request OF the Secretary OF the
Treasury, TO stave off the necessity for loan, IL had
been only so incorporated after 1t ascerianed that
The Seorearys fear erroneous and that the govern
meni actually had surplus II had been brought foI
ward at The last session, when the House had endorsed
The extravaganza OF the administration lie had not sus
laoed that recommendation. The Treasury Department
survey OF these warrants in first hands Mr.. Vnton,
at the SecreaIys request, had urged this appropria-
uon but the House refused to grant il by large
iorty. Then Mr.. Vinlon had opposed the BILL and fol-
lowedU TO the Senate 10 defeat it, Failing this object
he afterwards got this provso put into the civil and dpo
matte appropriation bill in the Senate The House would
have voted down. but the bill only back to them
at about IL p. OF the lat night of the sesAion
MIR. Nnton and others by urging that it would defeat
the great general appropriation bill TO attempt further
to amend i at that late period managed to get this OBJ
noxious proviso through
Mr. j. here called the previous question on re-
considering the vote By which the bill had been ordered
to be engrossed and read the third time which was sec