The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-02-23

RAILROADS. IN IOWA
liz THE senate, February II, 1852.

In THE SENATE, February IL, 1852.
= The Senate having under consideration s.
= bill granting the right OF way and making
grant of land to the State of Iowa, in aid I
/. the construction of certain railroads in Sal
: State
. Mr.. HUNTER said
l. Mr.. PRESIDENT When this bill was fir
calledup, and when, as supposed, 1t was abot
= to be acted upon, | submitted few remarks
relation to it; not that | thought Of arrestin
its passage, not with the design OF presentiD
an argument on the questions which 1t involved
but merely for the purpose Of defining my ow
position 1t seems to me, that must have bee
unfortunate in those remarks; for they hav
: drawn down upon me criticisms not only fror
various, but from very opposite quarters, and
have been assailed for them, not only by Til
friends, but by the foes of the measure. Sir,
said--addressing myself to my Democratl
friends-that we had taken ground against
general system of internal improvements; an'
put it to them to say, if there was not DANCE
in thus adopting what would seem to be par
tial system of Internal improvements that W,
had taken ground against general system o
the distribution of the public lands, and tina
yet we were passing bills of this character
which would lead to partial distribution o
| these lands amongst a portion only Of the
States.
TO this the Senator from Illinois MIR. DOUG
LAsl replied and he said it was no objection tc
an appropriation that it was partial in its charac
ter; because all appropriations must benefit some
localities more than others. ! say, it is an OBJ
lection to class of appropriations, if there be
partiality in the system and in the principle
upon which those appropriations are made.
take the very illustration he gives, as an in.
stance of the reason of the rule which laid
down. He said we make navyyards on the
seacoast, and that, of course, those places
where the navy yards are made are more bene
fitted than others. That is true, to some ex-
tent but tho design of those navy yards is to
maintain navy and that is general object in
which the whole nation is Interested This
| navy guards tho commerce. not only Of the sea-
coast, but of the whole country; not of the
East, or of the North, or of the South alone,
but also the commerce of the West. These
appropriations are general in their character,
general in their objects, and come therefore
within the legitimate sphere of our action. But
II admitted in the course of my remarks, that
there might, perhaps, be an exception to the
rule, with reference to certain class Of inter-
nal improvements certain class of railroads
which pass through the public lands; and that,
IN regard to these railroads, the government
| stood i'm somewhat different relation from that
which it held to railroads which pass through
| the older States, where the government owns no
lands. 1t is no argument in favor OF these
railroads, that they increase the wealth OF the
country through which they pass, and the capa
city of the people there for bearing taxation;
because the same argument would apply to
railroads in the older States. But it may be
| 10, oIu To
the fact that the government is benefited, not
only in the general mode in which it would be
benefited anywhere else by the establishment
of railroad, but it has peculiar and special
interest because its property as land owner, is
improved in value by the construction OF these
improvements.
But said, that it was admitted that the gen.
eral system is dangerous one; and that we
should practice it only in certain excepted cases
but that these exceptions ought to be guarded
within rigid limits, and by certain rules in order
to prevent abuses. said, too, that there was
no other rule by which to guard and define these
exceptions than this The United States was
to be treated as any other land owner; and any
| other land owner, when he contributed money,
would expect to have some return in the shape
of stock AS an additional precautiOn, | sug-
| pested that the grants ought to be confined to
the sections which lie Immediately upon the line
of the road because, when you once depart
from that rule-when you go fifteen miles from
the line of the road--the next step will be to
90 thirty miles, and the next will be to appropri-
ate lands anywhere within the confines of the
State In order, then, to prevent Our being be-
trayed into general and wasteful system, if we
do practice upon these exceptions, it would seem
that we ought to be guided by some strict and
certain rules; and know of none more certain
and strict than this
Since made these remarks, which were ut
tered without much consideration, and upon the
spur of the moment, have considered the ques
ton more maturely and think see rule by
which we may accomplish all the purposes OF
Justice, as between the United States and the
new States They say that the difference be.
tween these railroads and any others, is this
that, by the construction of these roads, you
give an additional value to the lands, and there
fore it would be hard if the United States should
paw nothing in return for this additional value
impaired to their property by the work of the
States. To that | reply, that am willing tc
sell to the States the lands on the lines of the
railroads, at the government price-at such price
rs they would bring if there were no railroads
And if there be additional value given by the
| construction OF Tie railroau, Hn Wiling the
States should have it. That would be fair Nay
sir, | might be disposed to go somewhat further
There might be portions of those lands not
worth the full government price. should be
willing then to take such price as they would
bring without the railroads. Having done that
would leave them to the States, to derive what
ever additional value they conld give to these
lands by the construction of their roads. Would
not that be fair? Would not that satisfy all
the just demands of the States? They make
railroads. or they ought to make them. only upon
the supposition that they are to return them a
fair proft-a profit composed, it may be, entire
y of the income of the road; or a profit com
posed not only of the income of the road, but
of the additional value given to the lands by the
construction of the Improvement. According
to the proposition which make, the States would
derive the whole of this pro6t-they would de.
rive, not only the income of the road, but the
additional value which would be given to the
lands. [ say, that if we were to practice upon
such a rule as this, we would do all that was
just, and save ourselves from the danger of be
ing committed either to a general system of in