The Nevada journal., 1852-01-31


L. S. SENATOR, The following is MIR.
Walsh's answer to series of questions
propounled to the various candidates fog
IT, s. Senator. The answer explains
the questions
SACRAMENTO CRY, Jan 24th, 1852,
GENTbrMEN:-Nour favor, desiring me
10 answer sundry questions, was duly
received, and shall eudeayor to do 50
as cxplicitely as possible.
To the first question answer ! am
not in favor of any change in the pre-"
sent tariff laws, except such chances as
might tend to lessen that mode of taxa
tion, and am decidedly in favor of the
ad-valorm system
To the second question answer !
| believe in the faithful Observance, by
( the authorities of each State, Of the fu
gitive slave law, passed by the last Con-
gress.
To the third question | answer: | am
in favor Of the sale or donation OF the
mineral lands. particularly that portion
OF them known as qlHrt@ mines here
are several reasons. tor tue good y.
California why a better tenure should
exist, SO far as quartz mines are con-
eerned Under the present system Of
uncertain possession, there is not sutt-
cient inducement to invite the necessa
ry amount Of capital to develop the
wealth of the numerous hills containing
gold bearing quartz whilst by giving
legal right in said hills, large amounts
Of capital would be invested in pnrchas-
ing them and putting up machinery to
work them and these investments
would undoubtedly be the means OF
largely increasing the revenue of the
State, and would be the means of equal
izing taxation and making it less bur-
densome. IL is not inn or,ans that thC
quantity sold should be ,arge. sale,
or donations IN quantities from five acre.
TO one huGdred feet square, would, NJ
doubt, be sufficient / he disposition o
the mineral lands in this State Is IA mat
ter of vital Importance. and demand
: immediate action no good can accrue
: from delay, whilst by prompt and pro
per action, new life is diifused in th'
whole length and breadth of the mininl
q counties, and consequently in all othe
departments Of business.
10 the fourth question, answer: d
not approve of the course taken by tn
e U. s. Indian Commissioners. The min
n ing counties require for agricultural pur
poses, all the land lying within thei
e borders, and capable of cultivation, am
G it is not proper that those lands shoul
:. be set apart In large bodies for the us
=" of small parties of Indians, who DO nc
e require such bodies Of land, and wh
II would never cultivate them.
To the remaining question ] answe
d as follows | should consider it a palpa
/ bic neglect of duty, for any Represer
!, tative from California, not TO urge O
u Congress the immediate establshmer
e OF branch mint in this State.
,f am not interested in any land grar
either directly or indirectly. am
tt favor of strict construction of the la
Is for the adjustment of land claims undo
Spanish or Mexican grants, and am
~ favor of donation of land by Congre
IS to actual settlers. | am also in tav
" of the most liberal appropriations to Il
State Of California by Congress; b
le position and resources demand ever
A. liberality that the General Goyernmel
i can consltutionally and equitably gran
- With much respect, am, gentlemen
"a Yours, very truly,
a. JAMES WALSH.
To the Hon. S. A. MoMEANs, &c.
ST