The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1852-02-18
Debate on tho final Passage of the Bill
for a grant of Lands to lOvafOr kailrOntts
CONTINUED.

I
u plying it TO the public expenditures, and reduc
e ing the taxes in another shape asd form b
o that amount. Then it will operate equally an
70 fairly upon all, and we will be dlschargin
every obligation which we owe to the ne,
y States And in keeping these lands, and look
It ing to them for the purpose of deriving revenu
If from them, acknowledge that we are boun
4 to look to the settlement, to the clearing up
the Improvement Of these lands, so TO dcvel
: OF the resources of the States. | am willn
> t. have liberal system for the purpose Of ef
It ffcting these objects But am not willing t
have partial distribution of the benefits Of tn
public lands os this character If anybody i
TO get it, shall be reioiced to see my fren,
: from Iowa Mr.. Dodge] carry his bill, if wer'
e at liberty to consult personal feelings only il
this matter 1t is from no opposition to him O
his State that oppose this bill, but from de
sire to see some fair, equal, and just system ad
D opted in relation to this matter.
But there is another thing to be looked to-
While we are thus squandering away the pub
lie land, we adopting almost evey proiec
that is brought forward in relation to it, no mat
ter how wild and visionary it may be, as if il
was to be despised and dsregarded as a source
OF revenue. The time has been when, SO fal
as the revenue, the financial system of this gov
ernment, was concerned, our public land wa.
the last basis upon which the public credit re
nosed And the time may perhaps come al
some future day, and the time will surely come
If we embark in general and lavish system OF
internal improvements, when we will again
have to look to this source to support and main
tain system of public credit. And believe
1t behooves us at some early day to look intn
this question, and adopt some system which will
take these public lands out of this loose system
of experiment, which everybody thinks he may
indulge in relation to them
1t has been urged as an argument, that we
had better do this than some other things in re-
lation to the public lands. l admit that there is
some force in that argument But let us not,
when we have the power to choose what Is
right, stand here choosing between evils, but
let us rather come together and mature a sys-
tenn which will be beneficial to all the country.
If we do not, it will lead to the other result.
and we will soon see majority Of the people
of this country camoring for distribution of
the proceeds Of the sales Of the public lands
among the States, and it will be a clamor not
easily to be resisted. You have heard the sen
ator from Georgia Mr.. Dawsonl say that hith-
erto lie has been opposed to such system but
if tais is persisted in it will be the only way
that will enable his State to get the ADVANTAGES
to which she is entitled, | hope some of our
western friends who are familiar with this sub
| ject will take this view Of it, and mature some
/
Mr.. DOUGLAS said The State of Hi
nois has been referred to in the course of this
debate and therefore feel bound to say word
or two in explanation. The allusion to the bill
passed yesterday for the State of Illinois, au-
thnrizng selection of lands away from the
line of the canal to which i, applied is not at
all applicable to the bill under consideration.
The reason why these lands were to be select
ed elsewhere than on the line Of the canal was
that Congress had grent"d them nearly twenty
years ago TO the State of Illinois for making a
canal and the United States afterwards sold
part of the lands thus granted, received the
money and put it in the treasury. And now
you only give refuse lands elsewhere, less
valuable than those originally granted, and that
after we had made the work in compliance with
your own act of Congress-
With regard to The bill granting lands TO the
State Of Illinois at the las, session, have also
word to say. That bill involved the same
principle as the on" now under consideration
Hence it was perfectly fair to reftr 10 that bill
in Illustration of this. But deny that what
has been said IN regard to donations, special
favors and partial distribution of The land. to
The new States has the slightest founda,on in
the bill before us, the act of the last session
granting lands to Illinois. Sir it is not a aucs-
ton Of the distributing of the public lands
among the States; it is not question of dona-
ion. If II were either, should be opposed to
it. | am opposed to the distribution of the
public lands, either by partial system or
general system. am opposed to aiding State
by giving lands donation.
The friends Of this bill do not rest it upon
any such grounds. We ask the opponents of
the bill to meet us in argument upon the grouds
which we assume. to imaginary objections of
their own The ground npon which we place
1t is this: and government of the United States
IS great land owner she has vast bodies of
land which she has had in market Tor thirty or
forty years, and experience proves that she can.
not sell them. Shall she keep them thirty or
forty years longer, and then not be able to sell
them' What advantage will they be to the
government while they are thus held, The
difficulty in the way Of their sale does not arise
from the fact that the lands are not fertile and
susceptible OF cultivation, but that they are
distant from market, and in many cases desti.
tute Of timber No matter how fertile and
productive they may be, still they are valueless
unless the produce will bear the expense of the
transportation 10 market. Il is on account of
the distance from mark and absence Of timber
that you cannot sell the lands, and cannot have
them brought under cultivation
The question then is, 'sW hat are YOU to do to
remedy the evil and enable you to sell your
lands and get the money for them into the
treasury, and also TO bring the country into
state of cultivation - Let me ask each sena-
tor what he would do if the case were his own,
What would you do if you were the landown
ers yourselves Suppose you owned three
hundred miles square of land which YOU could
not sell, and that you found, as is often the case
that the more land you owned the poorer you
were In consequence of the payment of taxes
on these lands; and suppose that would say
to yon, give me alternate sections eff six miles
through those lands, on condition that will
make railroad through them, and enable YOU
to sell the remaining lands for double the price
which experience had proven you could no,
get for the whole:' would you not gladly ad
opt the proposition as being good arranrlnen'
for your personal interest ? Would not the
half of the lands thus renaing to you be worth
more after the road was made than the whole
would be fore it was construc,ed9 That is
the simple question and, viewing it as such,
am satisfied that there is not single senator on
this floor who would not gladly make the ar
rangment if he were the individual landowner
And if this would be good arrangement for
any senator here, why would it not be good
policy for the country and for the government
OF the United States to adopt as landowners =
Mr. President, We insist that these grants in
aid ot the construction of railroads enhance the
value OF the land fund. Instead Of diminishing
The revenue that will be drrivable from public
lands, we contend that it will increase it. In
stead of diminishing your fund by this course,
we lncrease its value; instead of drpriving you
OF anything hch is really valuable to you,
we show you way whereby you make
that valuable which, under your presant policy,
is entirely valueiess This is the ground on
witch we defend this policy; and if it is not
drfrndable on his ground, there can be no JUS
tificaion of the grant
Now, take this particular case. Here is a
proposition to make railroad through the cen
tire OF the State of Iowa. If you make this
grant, you will double the value and double the
price OF the alternate sections and you will
! thus obtain for one-Ilali all that you pretend to
| ask for the whole. NV, submit TO the sena
tor from Virginia Mr.. Hunter whether, with
road running through them these lands are
not better worth tw" dollars and half per acre
than they are now worth a dollar and a quarter
without such road? But he will perhaps reply
that experience VIII show in the course of time
] that they will not be worth two d liars and
! half, and that then applications will be made