The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1852-07-07

road shall take.
Mr.. Clark. l will answer, that the Legislature
of Iowa have designated the route, inasmuch as
they have granted the right Of way; and i'll
pursuance of that legislation, the road has
already been surveyed and marked out to the
point to which called the attention of the CON-
mittee in my remarks the other day. The gen.
tleman therefore, is answered, l apprehend, in
that respect.
Mr.. Campbell will read the bill from it.
self: f
sAnd in case it shall appear that the United
States have, when the lines or routes on such
re ads are definiteIy fixed by the authority afore
said many sections" &c.
L infer from this that it remains for the Legis-
la,ure of the State of Iowa TO fix the line and
route of this road. -
Mr. Clark. In contemplation of the grant,
they have already done SO. They have marked
out the course it shall pursue and if they
fortunate enough to obtain the grant, it will be
only necessary to select the lard in pursuance
thereof, There is no difficulty, the refore, up
on that point; and the reason why intermediate
points were not named in the bill is most obvi-
Gus. The very same policy in this regard was
pursued as was observed in the Illinois grant
There were efforts made here, as am informed
for was not here then-to put points IN that
bill but they were objected to, as being Indt-
cative of individual efforts to build up indvdu-
al interests, and therefore it was thought a fair
and CORRECT policy that no intermediate points
should be named in the bill, and that they
should be open to the Legislative action of the
State. That bill was regarded as the model
bill, and this one has pursued that in its general
features. trust, therefore, that there Will be
lino objection to it in the minds Of gentlemen
who have heard me- as to the parallelIsm OF TINS
road If there is any objection of this kind, 1t
ought to have been raised and prevailed long
ago lsthere any good reason why the grant
| which we ask should now be defeated for rea-
son which heretofore has never been raised w.
| The gentleman, the other day, objected to the
roads prescribed by the Iowa bill, because they
were local. have word or two to say upon
| that point; l can assure gentlemen that will
not reiterate, save to very limited extent, what
| said then If there are; any roads in this
| country which are national in their character,
| thew are the roads which are marked out by the
iowa bill stated then, as will state again.
because there are those here now who were.
not here then. that the roads prescribed in that
bill take up the eastern roads precisely where
they end upon the Mississippi river, and carry.
them to the Missouri river. 1t the roads east Of
the Mississippi rive. are national in their char.
acter, and not local, how can the objection be
: raised when those roads shall cross that great
stream into the State of Iowa Now, the Dubu-
que road takes up the central Illinois road, and
also the Chicago andMiss road, which converge
, before they reach that point. 1t the Dubu-
que road is constructed, it will be prolonga-
= ton both of the central Illinois and Chicago
; and Mississippi roads. lfthe grant is made for
: the Davenport and Council Bluffs road it will
. take up the Chicago, La Sale, andIlock Is
land road, which is in rapid process of
construction, and carry it through the heart Of
Iowa, to an important point on the MsssourI
river, Council Bluffs great point where the
travel which goes to California and Oregon
: crosses, and from which, as we are warrented in
believing, road will traverse the valley Of the
! Platte, and ultimately cross the Rocky Noun
, tains at the south pass The Burlington and
= Missouri river road possesses the same
national characterstic-t is the p-olongation Of
= eastern roads from Wheeling, Pittsburg, and
!. Philadelphia. l trust that these considerations
' will fairly meet and neutralize the objection
! which the gentleman from Illinois has raised
against these roads, that they are merely local,
and not notonal in their character.
Undoubtedly, the constitutional rule upon
: this subject Is satisfied with any disposition of
: the public lands, which dispenses equal benefits
to all the people; or as nearly practical le-
! gislation will allow.
Are not railroads direct benefit to all clas-
!. SEES. As the producer from the soil is benefit
;, ed, so is the mechanic, the hodcarrier, and the
: sowing woman. sIft zft
But the foregoing argument Is wholly indepen-
u dent of the increased price Of the reserved
d tons. The demands ofthc Constitution would
y be satisfied without such increase in the price !;
but with it the most improbable and hair split
% ing minds have been driven in their resistance,
u TO the most futile objections, such as that the
sections sought to supply loss cannot be in
10 creased in price When the argument is thus
IS narrow and weak, is not worthy to be refuted,
d because those who make it do not wish to be
e convinced. 81 a asa s-stE# E~sE
1 1t has been said that we ask for grants ofland
and claim that it is insraction of the Consti-
It tuition, upon the ground that the sections re-
!, tanned to the Government are doubled in price
o and value and then, the question has been ask
n ed rWhv may not Government itself con-
n struct railroads for the purpose of improving its
d entire domain submit that the question is
o wholly misconceived and msstated. The Gov
eminent does not, by making these grants, enter
J. upon internal improvements relydischarged
aduy 1t is necessary for the best interests Of the
people in the new States where the public lands
e lie, that these Improvements should be had, and
e sooner or later they will make them by slower
: or more rapid degrees they will carry them for
lie ward to completion. And from this very
4 fact derives direct and sensible advantage in
Is the increased sale of its lands and at better pri
re ces. l need not stop to show that projected
Sc railroads have, caused ready sale for immense
o. tracts of woodless praires, which, without them,
re would not have sold for centuries to come.
before which for practical purposes, were no
e. better than sterile wastes i ask, therefore if
p there is not clear duty upon the Government
m to assist in those improvements OF the common
le property from which it derives sensible bene-
fit, Were Government not sovereign, were it
governed instead of governing, it could be for
Iced to this charge of duty. Is 1t any the less a
- duty because it cannot be enforced
lc;I This view Of the subject brings the whole case
% to a focus-the object in making the grants in
u the discharge of duty. 50 far as the Govern
le ment is concerned. The Government, as a
Government, may hare little use for the roads !;
IS she NAV have none fat al-but she has no right
70 to come in for benefits here she has made no
:, contribution in the outlay. The increased va
lue of the lands to the Government is no part OF
the object It is mere consequence, designed
- as an inducenent to the discharge OF duty
which we feared would not otherwise be per-
formed. r.
This Is not internal improvement by the Gov
. ernment-the Government takes no step, gives
= no counsel incurs res ponsbility. the Gov
: eminent has no power to construct railroads
: but it has power to dispose Of its lands. Should
Z Government construct railroads it must, of ne
cessity, exercise all the rights of ownership and
= jurisdiction within the States where they are
:. This would initiate against the rights of the
;. States, and absorb power which does not be-
, long to it. This, surely, would be widely diff
. ferent and distinct thing from what it is to make
= contribution to the States whose Jurisdiction is
:, perfect, and whose interest is sure guarantee
a that the fund will be faithfully expended.
1t is said the new States are settling rapidly
I enough; that they are fast increasing in num-
bers, while the old States scarcely advance at
, all. Surely the old States do not wish to pur-
sue a policy which would prevent the settle
ment Of the vast public domain, even retard
it. 1t cannot be the policy Of the old States to
! keep those who are born to no inhcritance, i'll
condition Of tenancy and dependence to the more
: favored in those States. How can it be cause
Of regret that the new States increase in popu-
lation while the old do little more in this respect
. than to hold their own' There is no loss, but
absolute gain in the aggregate. If thousands
prefer to be propretors of the soil in new coun-
fru rather than he hirelnus in the old States to