The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-03-23

did not overlook justice to the settler. went on and
Instructed the committee 10 provide
"Pe-empon in favor Of all those bona fds settled
upon the public lands, with view OF securing homes fol
Others"
Thus you perceive that provide homes for all those
who had bona tide settled in their own right aud for
themselves and not TO lands for others At that
day, well recoect the idea sugg ested that there
were set OF men who had money, but could moi
10 themselves pteemptons by settling upon all the good
lands-all the fine town sites and ferry places They
lacked the power OF ubiquiy; but to obvate that dis
advantage they were in the habit OF hiring A, b, and
TO make settlements and procure pre- empons upon favor
lie sites for them and by such choice
spots TO themselves My proposition contemplated break
ing up that system OF fraud provided that settlers
should be secured In their homes which they had settled
for themselves. but should not be secured when il
shown that they had settled for the ben of spec
ulaor. and not for themselves. | tnen concluded my
proposition by saying
And 70 prevent settlements upon the public land from
Ass Isssly saisssA and paid for"
suppose this latter part Of my proposition is the main
principle upon which the gentleman relies to sustain his
charge OF hostility on my part TO the settlers What was
my object in offering thati II jusiice--it i'm.
paaltyt was TO prevent specializing settler and in
truder against the law upon Indian lands, from getting
an advantage over men who abided by the law, and
waited until the lands had been surveyed and regularly
brought into the market | wished all to have an equal
chance desired 10 avoid scramble for preferences by
".
read my propositions They prove my desire TO secure
bona fde settler right to e-emplion; but with view
oil getting clear OF all the frauds which suggested
and which believed to exist in very great degree
| thought change of system absolutely necessary /
proposed therefore, that when the Indian lands pur
chased instead OF allowing specializing settlers to run
territory until il actually surveyed and ready for the
markets and then they might enter upon il under that
system Of graduation which, proposed, pay their money,
ana get Their lands II that be hostility, the gentleman
n rght N akp tho npat of IN
to me to be justice, and nothing but justice.
have thus replied to the charges of parality and hos
uity. BY an explanation and exhibition of facts wish
now 10 call The attention OF the Senne and country 10
few more things which have been brought my mind by
the arguments OF the senator from Iowa.
The senator says he can vote for improvements upon
the great arteries OF commerce. such the Mississippi
Hver-l believe he mentioned The Mississippi, but do
not know whether he mentioned the Ohio perhaps be
did both national improvements but that he could
moi vote Tor the Improvement OF such river the
illinois. which connects the Mississippi with the lakes
Now. wish 10 inquire for short time whether, under
the powers which this government possesses under
rational construction OF the constitution, any such dis
tncton can be taken between the improvement of such
river as the Mississippi, running through and by
various States, and the Improvement of such river
as The Illinois, confined within the limits of sim
gle State Does the length of river make its improve
ment national and constitutional, and the shortness of
another rIver render lis improvement Unconstitutional
Is II constitutional to improve river which touches
many States, and unconstitutional to improve river that
touches only State II there any such disinc
tons as these in the constitution, cannot fnd them
According TO my idea, the nationality and constitution
aly Of public work is not to be tested by the length OF
the river, or IFS particular locality in reference 10 the
States But there Is sensible rule which will deter
NINE the nationality and constutenality of public
work, and which, Think, no sober, rehecting inves
gazing, patriotic mind can deny What is II depends
upon the use OF the thlng-wheher il is national moi
national II the government has great use for il. II is
national. IL the government has for il, il
can be national, aud never pertain the execution
OF any OF the powers of the government II the gov
L n ha py n
Its powers, and becomes national by It's very connexlon
point oil utility with the operations OF the government
II the government cannot it, then it be
national whether the liver be thousand miles long.
or five hundred, one hundred. Ii does not depend
upon the length, upon the number Of States through
which il may run, to make it national or 10 lose that
character. IL depends totally and entirely upon The
amount Of that the government has for IT, and that
use must be connected with the execution OF the powers
OF the government.
To illustrates Suppose we were at war again with Great
Britain, and the mouths Of the Chesapeake and Delaware
blockaded. and New York also. so that you could
not send fishing boat TO sea. From the head OF the
Chesapeake bay to the Delaware river, all know
canal has been made about fifteen miles long. But
suppose that instead OF being fifteen miles apart, the
Chesapeake and Delaware at that point approxlmaied
within mile and suppose that instead of taking year
10 make canal through, the force which the govern
meni could bring 10 il could cut il and put il in use in a
week put ii TO Congress- put it To the
OF every man who hears the question and the facts
stated whether. this state of the case the government
might not, for military and naval purposes, cut that
nal, mile long, between the waters OF the Delaware
and Chesapeake baysl suppose gentlemen would say
that in time OF perhaps, such thing might be done,
and that would be national work open that mile OF
communication. even ii II were exclusively within the
limits OF The little State OF Delaware because there would
be great and controlling necessity for its the
part of the government The proves that be nation
sly OF the work depends its in executing
power vested IN the government And here the mill
tary and naval powers that cannot well operate under
such state OF blockade unless by constructing the
nal. and opening the communication from bay 10 bay
You may have naval force but II is divlded-balf in
the Delaware and bali in the Chesapeake. II you can
unite them by this canal and throw them together they
may whip the enemy areiibot outlet Here is military
and naval operation for you You perceive, in this
that mile makes work just national as II II was
five thousand miles Turn 10 the genileman's He
vote for the improvement OF large river like the
Mississippi, but not for the Illinois Now, the Illinois
river and the connexion between The Illinois and Chi
more valuable than any portion OF The Mississippi and
Missouri above the mouth OF the Missouri and why
Because OF the which the government has for that
particular work IN transporting troops and military and
naval supplies. The being the rule OF nationality
and the government having much more use ior The
municailon along the Illinois and canal up 10 Chi
cago and thence down the lakes the gentleman ought to
for these improvements preference 10 voting for
one upon The Mississippi or Missouri, where the govern
ment not benefited to such extent by the oi the
Improvement Sir, IL that the politicians oil
The country have puzzled II distracted their brains
with their theories IN regard 10 national works OF IN
ternal Improvement inqurng whether rivers long
short whether they touch more States whether
they be improved above ports OF entry delivery
without paving The least attention TO the rule OF truth
and safety palpable clear-to wit the utility Of the
work in aiding government 10 execute the great objects
and powers oil the constitution,
But TO illustrate again We now have the SauIt Ste
Marie, whore canal one mile IN lengthihe distance