Washington sentinel., 1854-06-01
Washington gentinsl.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE PUBLIC LANDS.
spEECH OF HON. II. M. SHAW,

In tie House Of Representatives, May 70, 1854.
The House as in Committee of the Whole on
the state of the Union, having under consid-
Grafton the Pacific railroad bill, Mr.. BoCocK
in the chair.
Mr. SHAW said:
Mr.. CHAIRMAN regret that find it neces-
sary to occupy, in the discussion of one sub
iect, any portion of the time which has been
set apart by special order for the considera-
ton Of another; and my regret is the greater
because my friend from California, MIR. Nc
DouGALL] with great iberality consented moro
than once to the postponement of his bill, in
order that we might 60 on with one that has
occupied so much Of the time and attention OF
this body; but have desired for some time to
address the committee upon the subject of the
public lands, and ! feel constrained to avail
myself Of this, the first opportunity that has
been afforded me- And yet, after the able ar
gument made by my friend from Ohio, Mr..
DIsNEY,1 j approach that subject with so much
dilfidence that should have contented myself
with giving silent vote upon the bill offered
by the gentleman from New York, but for the
speech made by my colleague, Mr. ROGERS,
who, regret is not now in his seat. As that
speech is to have wide circulation in North
Carolina, ! cannot consent that it shall 60 forth
from lnlS Hail WltHOul al eHOTl Oh my part W
show, as think ! shall, that it abounds in er,
roneous statements, untenable assumptions,
and fallacious reasoning.
There is much, however, of what my col
league has said, and well said-indeed may
say all he has said--in regard to the common
and equal right of all the States in the public
domain, in which fully concur.
knowthat an effort was, at one time, made to
set up a claim in favor of the new States to all
OF the public lands within their limits but it
met with little favor even in those States
themselves; and | presume there is no one
upon this floor who will controyert the PROPOSE
ton that the public domain of this countryis
the common property Of all the States, and
ought to be disposed of for the common benefit
of ALL The nature of our government, the con-
ditioas upon which the several States are united
together, the terms upon which the seven old
States ceded their lands to the general govern
ment and the manner in which the balance Of
the public domain has been acquired, are
altogether sufficient to render any argument
to prove the correctness of this proposition
quite superauous.
Sir, in constitutional government like ours
where the only hope of a lasting union depends
upon strict adherence to the letter and spirit
OF that sacred compact by which the several
Safes are united together as so many con-
federated republics, the federal legislature
should carefully abstain from the exercise ofan
unwarranted or even doubtful power, especial.
ly when the public safety or the public interest
do not call for it, as in mere question Of poll
cy in regard to the management of the public
lands. The master spirits who originated the
policy Of distribution, devoted no little pains
in their efforts to prove the constitutionality of
that system. How has my colleague disposed
ofthis important question? Simply by quoting
the I'd clause Of the Sd section of the 4th arti-
Gle of the Constitution, and reading para
graph from speech made by my friend from
South Carolina, Mr.. ORR. made, as / appre-
hend in support of what ] believe all parties
concede, the power of Congress to make grants
of alternate sections of the public lands, to aid
in the construction of railroads by which the
reserved sections would be enhanced in value,
and such as could not otherwise be disposed of,
rendered salable.
When the great leader Of the whig party, Mr..
Clay, undertook to defend the constitutionality
Of distribution, he was accustomed to exert all
the energies Of his mighty intellect in argu-
ments deduced from the Constitution and drawn
from the deeds Of cession. My colleague makes
short work of it; he reads clause from that
instrument, quotes the gentleman from South
CarOlUa, anu COupldCtulIy IGpOSSo iIOIu Hla
labor. And what is there in the clause of the
Constitution upon which he relies, and which
is now the only authority upon which the friends
Of this system depend, which authorizes Con-
gress to make any such disposition Of the pub
lie lands?
"Congress shall have power 10 dispose of and
make all needful rules and regulations respecting
the territory or other property belonging TO the
United States
Now, apprehend that, if this clause proves
anything to the point, it proves too much, and
therefore proves nothing; for it will be observed
that the same power is given to Congress over
the "other property that is given over the
public lands; and idesire to ask my colleague
if he believes that Congress has the power to
distribute among the States the forts, arsenals,
magazines, navy-yards, the ships of our navy,
and all the other property IN the possession of
the government? Why, sir, this construction
would involve the power to impose taxes upon
the people for the purpose of purchasing lands
to distribute among the people again; and
equally the power to take money out of the
treasury to distribute in the same way! j am
sure that he win contend for no such monstrous
doctrine. Give to the Constitution such con-
struction and you establish for Congress the
power to do all that have said-to dispose oil
and divide among the States an the property
belonging to the confederacy, even this Capitol
in which we are now deliberating; power to
which there would be no limit, except wild
and boundless discretion Of Congress. No, sir;
our Constitution is one of certain specified
powers, well defined. You can dispose Of the
public lands and appropriate the money in the
same way you can money drawn from the peo-
pie by taxation, for any legitimate object which
the Constitution aathorises Congress to ac-
complish, aud no more. As to the authority
drawn from the speech Of my friend from South
Carolina, am sure that gentleman will tell
my colleague that no speech which he ever
made can be cited in support of the consti-
tutional power of Congress to distribute the
proceeds of the sales of the public lands or to
divide the lands themselves, without perver
sion Of its meaning and intent.
But let me come now to the expediency of
distribution. My colleague says he is "in favor
Of distribution of the proceeds arising from
the sales of the public lands, or a division Of
the lands themselves, among all the States &C
cording to their representation upon this floor :
Now, think shall be able to show that, be
such policy, the greatest injustice would by
~ III