Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1854-07-19
THE PUBLIC LAND QUESTION.

The House being in Committee OF the Whole on
the state of the Union
Mr.. Disney resumed, and proceeded as follows:
In making this remark, of course except the five
per cent of the proceeds of the sales But that was
under the compacts with the new States, and even
it was so applied as to directly not remotely but
directly enhance the value of the public lands, it
being applied, by stipulation by the United States,
for the construction of roads, which, of necessity,
enhanced the value of it's domain.
shall undertake to show that never, in the his
tory of Governments nor in the history of private
individual ownership of vast tracts of land has there
been so rigid an economy practced in their DISPOSE
ton as has been practced by the Government of the
United States in relation to its domain, and instead
of its course being liberal profuse and generous it
has been rigorous, exacting and oppressive to the
new States
OF all the absurd ideas that entered the heads
of legislators this idea that the States Of the
Union have been favored by grants of the public
lands is pre-eminenty and par excellence the most
absurd of all. Instead of beginning by way OF COM
pensating the old States of the Union in consequence
of liberal grants Of land made to the new States, the
point of beginning, if justice is the aim, is exactly
apon the other side. Liberality should be common
ccd with the new States of the Union, ain not the
old. This can demonstrate by statements from
the record and by facts which cannot be galnsayeu
At present return to the delectable document sub
mitted by the gentleman from New York, (Nlr. Ben
nett) and which contains statements that nave peen
repeated by all the Wings in and out OF Congress
who have spoken upon this subject. L proceed 10
oSoNH-O..)
that this document was the most remarkable OF all
the documents that have over been submitted upon
this subject, not in containing single error, but IN
not containing single truth. 1t Is not only wrong
in it's more important statements and allegations
but it is wrong in all its immaterial facts wrong IN
its most minute statements not even getting rght
by accident ] trust when have done with that
document that will never hear OF 1t again, elther
in or out of Congress.
The report talks about the profuse and extraVa-
CANT grants that have been made from time to Tune
and which sanctioned, he says, by all the az
ferent Presidents, and applied to every concelVaoe
ourpose He goes on and enumerates the various
purposes. Among them are the following for
schools for seats of government for roads, Tor COL
leges for public buildings, for semnarles OF learn
ing, for river improvements, for individuals, LOT
companies for corporations, for private CLAIMS lor
military services, for internal improvements, Tor
canals, for railroads, for deaf and dumb asyums, DC
And by the way, Mr. Chairman, with respect to TINS
matter of deaf and dumb asylums, he says that
grants for this purpose were made to CONNECTICUT
to Alabama to Arkansas, and to Florida. 1t seems
impossible for him to get right.
Now, there never any grant made for deaf
and dumb asylums except in two solitary instances;
and in neither of these was the grant made TO
q State. The only two grants OF the KIND that |
made by Congress, We're to the States oil !
Connecticut and Kentucky. The State OF Kentucky |
located in Florida the lands coded to her for that
purpose and the gentleman finding that there were
lands for deaf and dumb asylum located in tlorl-
da, at charges the State OF Florida with having
received the grant Now all that Florida had to do
with it. is the fact that the lands happen to be found
within her limits, but they owned by the State
of Kentucky. So it was, also, in the case OF Ala
bama and Arkansas The State of Connecticut To-
Gated the lands granted to her for deaf and dumb
ASYLUM in those States. But the gentleman finding
lands located in Arkansas and Alabama for the pur-
pose of supporting deaf and dumb asylums, at once
assumed that grants OF lands had been mace To tnese
States for that purpose.
repeat it. Mr. Chairman, there never was any
grant made to Alabama, to Arkansas, or to Florida,
for deaf and dumb asylum; and OF the States
which the gentleman here enumeTate as having re-
ceived grants for that purpose he is right in but
solitary instance and neither of the other States
enumerated by him has received grant of the sort
Now, Mr.. Chairman is it not marvellous, that IN
public official paper of this sort-a paper which has
been so much quoted and relied upon-that there is
not solitary statement in it found to be correct?
But go back to the grants of swamp lands. In
my previous remarks on this question, showed, as
I assume, concusively, that the cession of swamp
lands to the States in which they were located was
a saving to the General Government. lShowed that
the grants of swamp lands were not grants within
the meaning of that term it is used in this report
have shown that the swamp lands were valueless.
In the language of the grants to the States, they
were lands unfit for cultivation. And l have also
shown in addition, that this Government, as the
proprietor of these lands, found itself to be the own
er and maintainer of public nusances, which, by
every principle of equity and by common law, they
we're bound to remove. The Government, 10 get rid
Of the obligation imposed it as the proprietor OF
we're and are, to the several States in which they
lie.
have shown, Mr.. Chairman, that there have been
charged as grants made to the State of Ohio lands
which the General Government never owned-lands
owned BY the States of Connecticut and Virginia. |
showed, too that the gentleman was in error in
charging Florida and Louisiana and other States of
he Union with lands which were owned by private |
Individuals, before the Government got posses
lion of those countries. They were lands which
we're protected by express stpulations in the trea-
les with the Powers and Governments from which
We obtained the territories
Now, the report parades column of figures, in !
which the gentleman makes out that hundred
md twenty three millions Of of the public lands
lad been granted to the several States. But the
marks that have made in relation to the swamp
ands and to the school lands, and to lands which
o private individuals, should not have been nclud-
d. Adding up the lands comprised in these items
find the aggregate to be one hundred and two mil
onsfour hundred and ninety-fou thousand nine =
hundred and thirty-six acres This is to come at Il
me sweep, out of the total summed up by the gen- I
leman in his report. These one hundred and two y
million four hundred and ninety -four thousand nine
hundred and thirty-six of the public lands de-
ucted from the one hundred and twenty-three mil
ions of acres which the gentleman has charged in 3
lis report as having been granted away by the Co.
eminent, reduces the quantity to twenty million s
i've hundred and five thousand and sixty-four acres
hat is aal that is left to be charged on account
{ grants. Abstracting only these three or four 5
TENS, and have this terrible reduction in the fig
res which the gentleman paradcs, and shall pro- u
eed to show the character of the balance of these
rants. But the gentleman made error in his ad- ?