The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-08-21

he should have cha gpd his mind and 10 40 for
Gen Scott IL would have been only following the ex-
ample sci 10 him al the baltimore ConyentoD--~h this
exception, thai he not prompt al turning, AMI !,
took him longer lime 10 accomplish the operation than
il did the Others Upon that subject ! thlak ,ha' my
friend from Wisconsin Mr. WALKERl should be a little
charitable 10 the senator from Connecticut
So much Tor all OF this y-pay Z
Now, Mf, President, wish 10 say a word WIN regard
10 the question before the Senate. The original amend
proposed TO grant 100000 Tor the construction OF
this canal That was voted for by my friend from Miehl
gan. 1 voted for and II could have had the pre-
vision 10 the bf that had been The simple provision OF
the BILL would for lis passage now But il
proposed only that the 500 900 acres OF land
posed 10 be ganed By the bill when originally introduced
shall be appropriated but my friend from Missouri Mr.
ATCHisos by his amendment proposes 10 increase IL TO
100000 OF land. Now sir desire TO be informed II
this $500 900 was considered sufficient TO execute
this work, upon what principle is il that propose
10 give 75oO 900 of land to accomplish il Waving
all objections to the granting OF land presume that there
ought 10 be some proportion between the value OF The
land 10 be granted and the cost OF the object to be
compshed II 100000 would have been sufficient 10
accomplish this workwhch lsuppose is clear. or other
wise my friend from Michigan would not have voted for
that appropriaton-upon what principle Is that At Is
now proposed TO increase the appropriation from 100000
acres OF land, which the original bill proposed to 10000
acres! wish some explanation OF that Tor sup
pose this 100000 acres OF land must amount 10 near
81 900 000 in value.
Mr.. CASS. only wish TO say one word, The re-
The gentleman from North Carolina an illus
aton OF whole land affairs There IS great error
IN supposng that because you fix minimum price OIL VI 70
lime you ax that price Ii has nothing 10 do with the
value of the land Ii you could sell the land at once for
thai price, and get The cash for IT, then i would be worth
81 25 per acre but ii you sell it for that price, IT
is not worth it, and everybody knows it. Ii you esu,
mate all the land which has remained unsold since 1859
twenty five that time, il would bring
il up 10 81 25 now. The fact is that the land upon
Lake Superior not worth 81 rs acre. II could not
be sold for that Then there will be the expense OF adj
gle individual. He embark large amount OF capt
tai in the work. in order TO be able to go on with IT, fie
cannot sell the land That understand to be the opera
Mr.. DOUGLAS. must say word in reply TO my
friend from North Carolina. Mr.. BADGERl who en-
tertaned us few moments since Ii was prompt IN
congraiuahng the democratic party upon the result OF
the national nomination at Baltimore, certainly cam
with equal prompness, congratulate the senator from
Connecticut { Mr.. SMITH in having the senator from
North Carolina TO speak for him to-day. instead OF al
tempting TO respond for himself the speech OF the SEN
ator from Wisconsin, [Mr. WALKER 1t may answer
the purpose of the from Connecticut remain in
silence and allow the gentleman from North Carolina 10
pronounce the document read hoax. But, sir, would
like to hear the from Connecticut himself rise in
signed by the parties, ranked by the parties. and sent
throughout this country would like to hear that denial
from the senator from Connecticut after hearing the SEN
a,or from North Carolina pronounce It 10 be hoax.
Mr. BADGER. That is lair. Give him chance.
Mr. DOUGLAS. | will give him chance. | wait
Mr. WELLER. You will have to wait some time
Mr. DOUGLAS. find, sir, that shall have TO wait
some time N order to get that response
Mr. SMITH have 10 say to the Senate that occu.
seat here Tor the purpose OF discussing questions oil
public policy; and when member of this body far
togeis the respect that is due to the Senate and due to
himself as TO bring in here common ,blackguardsm
IRON the newspapers, will treat him with silent
Tempt. HH sIaU
Mr. DOUGLAS yielded the floor to
Mr. WALKER who said admit that pc rhaps il was
little deviation from the rules that prescribed govern
eebate that should have introduced the circular signed by
the senator from Connecticut And must respond also
the truth OF his observation, when he acknowledges
a niece u pOtie IN
IN this CITY whether genuine or not do not know, be-
cause we have not got an answer as TO that fact But
that is piece OF blackguadism, without aributing
10 the senator, every respectable man IN the community
knows and admits il to anch.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. TMr NoRRIs.l Occu-
pyng the Char temporarily, although be has been I'M
der the impression thai this whole debate has been
of ORDER the Chair has been unwilling 10 interfere.
He will now respectfully say that he deems the whole
debate upon ihis point entirely out OF order.
Mr. DOUGLAS will merely remark that would
no, have alluded this but for the fact that OF
high standing and character distinguished for his In.
iegy, had pronounced II hoax upon the floor OF the
Senate.
MIR BADGER You know it is.
Mr. DOUGLAS The senator says know now that
it's. Sir, have reason to believe that 1t is no aud
VIII give you my reasons Tor that belief have thai
very document returned here in envelope, which
yeope bad upon it the frank in his own handwriting Of
one OF the persons signing it. II had been distributed
throughout this country as genuine document have
seen one returned very recently from the Stale of Con-
nec,cut; and the member Of Congress TO whom il
returned went 10 the member who had ranked j, and
whose name 10 IL and thai member acknowledged
that he had ranked it, and that II genuine docu-
ment.
Mr. BADGER. Is he member of this body9
Mr. DOUGLAS He is member of the other House
supposed that If il was genuine of those sign
ing II, was ranked of by him, il genuine docu-
ment to them all. That being the case submit the
question OF morality to the Senate and to the country
10 what Justification can be given for styling themselves
democrats, in order to palm oil upon the public the i'm
preston that they were democrats protesting against the
nomination OF the democratic nominee. submit TO the
Senate and to the country the question OF morality
10 the truth or alsehood OF the document leave be-
Connecticut the question OF the proprety of bringing the
document before the Senate. Ii there any black
guardIsm IN reading II than in writing in franking it,
leave i 10 the people 10 form their judgment upon
that point.
! have word or two which | should lik. 10 say
upon this bill but lest II should call for a response
IRON some gentleman, think II will be best 10 refrain,
with the hope that The question may be taken.
Mr.. JONES, OF Tennessee ! certainly desire, sir
10 take no part IN this debate, either upon the bill be-
fore The Senate or upon the collateral issue which has
been raised between the from Connecticut and
Wisconsin. But | confess my asonishment that the
senator from Illinois should have given SO much di Eny
and Importance 10 this matter. should not have felt
called upon to- say word, but from the fact that the
name oil one OF my colleagues in the other branch of
the Congress OF the United States is appended TO the
paper which has been read As he is not permitted 10
speak here Tor himself, |, as his friend, undertake 10
speak for him.
was not here. Mr.. President, when that paper made
it's appearance. When l returned TO Washington met
with It, took Al up without reading il, and put il in
my pocket, supposng it 10 be genuine document, as
saw the names appended to it. Some days afterwards
looked al IT, and II occurred me that il was very
strange document TO be signed by the persons whose