Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-09-13
masbimgtnn gentinsl,
From the Richmond Enquirer, 9th inst
The Hunter Land Bill.

lHe hunter Lana bilI.
The land bill, proposed by Mr.. Hunter, an,
adopted by the unanimous vote Of the demo
cratic party in the Senate, has met with an ap
proval, scarcely less unanimous, from the de
mocratic press of the Union. Almost the onl
exceptions are TO be found in Virginia, and her,
the opponents of the bill form but a thin mi
nority of the party.
Amongst these, some have thought proper
to assail the measure, and the motives of il
friends, with extraordinary violence To al
such, we have no reply TO make. Mr.. Hunter
has served in the public councils for twenty
years, and if, in all that time his conduct has
not won so much of the confidence of his coun.
trymen as will protect him from the imputaton
of unworthy motives at the first difference Of
opinion, then were it truly waste of words to
defend him. We would only ask whether I'll
the other democratic senators are to be de-
nounced as traitors along with him? Are the
Enquirer and other Virginia papers, who sup
port the bill, also false to the Constitution
And are they less trustworthy guides, than the
few who oppose it so violently? When they
are all expelled from the party, these new
heads OF the church can recruit their ranks with
such allies as the whig papers, who are now
delightedly barking on the attempt to chase
down every one who has heretofore been trusted
by the democracy.
But there are others, who oppose the bill in
o very different spirit, whose opinions and mo-
tives we highly respect We feel sure that they
will give us an impartial reading, and we think
we can present some facts and considerations,
which will place the bill in different light
from that in which they have heretofore seen it.
There are still more, who await fuller infor-
nation to form q Judgment. Not many have
time to examine the question for themselves
and in the present apathetic state Of the public
mind on political subjects, still fewer have the
inclination. From all such, we ask an atten
tive hearing, while we briefly explain this meas
ure, and suggest some Of the chief arguments
in its favor.
Let us remark, in the beginning, that its pro-
visions have been grossly misrepresented, and
its true character studiously concealed. We
have been told by turns that it gave all the
lands away to paupers and emigrants; then
that it gave them away to railroad companies
and finally that it was donation to the new
States. These charges are not only inconsis.
tent with each other, but they are without any
Just foundation. The bill does nothing of the
sort, and we think we can show that it care
fully guards the revenue of the general govern.
ment, while, in strict conformity to the State
rights doctrines, it takes from Congress, and
RENTS to the several States the administration
of interests, which are local and peculiar to
themselves.
Beforewe go further, we must notice one point,
upon which some of Mr.. Hunters assailants
have laid much stress. They have seriously
charged that he introduced this bill at a late
day of the session, and Smuggled it through
the Senate, without allowing an opportunity
for discussion, either then, or by the public
press. We say nothing of the great complai.
sance here attributed to the Senate in permit.
ting itself to be gagged; but beg attention to
Few dates-those stubborn marks of time,
which SO often force an unwilling confession of
truth. For on the 2lst day of last March,
when the session was little over three months
old, and still had nearly FIVE to run, Mr.. Hunter
introduced into the Senate two bills, which con.
tanned the substance, nearly in the same words,
of every clause in the present bill, except the
homestead sections. Many of the chief papers,
out of Virginia, called attention to them, and
we remember that at least one In the State,
1.-THE Alexandria Sentinel was then aware Of
the fact, and volunteered an expression of IA
vorable opinion. Nor is this all more than
two years ago, on February 18th, 1852, Mr..
Hunter made a speech on the Iowa land BILL
in which he distinctly avowed himself, las ex-
tracts we shall make hereafter will show, in
favor of the policy embodied in the present
bill. This speech was much noticed and COM
mended at the time, and it is not wholly forgot
ten even now; for some, who have attacked
the speaker most violently, have quoted from
it to prove his inconsistency; Int their quota.
HoaS begin and stop just acAere an extension
io0uld hare sho,cn the utter grOundlessness of
the charge. We leave others to Judge their
motives
We may, perhaps, be told that the obiec,
lions 10 the bill are only to its homestead sec.
tons, which were not contained in the bills of
last March, and we believe that this is the
ground of most Of the honest opposition in Vir-
ginia. Let US then see how the case stands in
reference TO those sections.
The bills introduced in last March, carried
into practice the principles of the speech of
February IL. 1852, and are the fair expression
of the land policy which Mr.. Hunter thought
wsest and best, in the then condition of affairs.
But, since then, the Homestead has a second
time passed the House Of Representatives by
an increased vote, and it became apparent,
after an obstinate struggle in the Senate, and
repeated failures Of motions TO lay on the table,
and 10 postpone, that it would pass that body
also.f Even il arrested by the Executive Veto
which was very doubtful, no well informed per-
son could doubt that it would continue TO be
pressed at each succeeding session, with re-
newed energy and power, and if it did not at
last command the twothirds vote, necessary to
override the veto, yet it would enter the Presi-
dental canvass and all party contests, rs
most corrupting and demoralizing element, and
ultimately succeed, unless the entire land ques
ton could be meantime settled on some firm
and satisfactory basis Mr.. Hunter saw this,
and 80 did all the democratic senators, who
were opposed to the House bill; they saw that
il could be defeated only by substituting for il
Mr. Hunters bill Of last March, with some ad
ditional sections, containing qualified dis
elimination in favor Of the actual settler. 1t
was necessary TO choose between the two; and
the question for rs is narrowed down to this :
which is the best, the House Homestead BILL
or Mr. Hunter Substitute?
The House bill gives quarter section tl60
acres) Of land 10 any free white person, whether
native or foreign born, who choosesto occupy
Il, provided that, IL foreigner, he shall have
first declared his intention to become a citizen.
The benefit Of the homestead provision, in the
Hunter substitute, is confined to free white per-
sone nanahlo of holding lands undpr the laws