Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-07-29
Wasbington gentinsl.
SENATOR HUNrERs LAND BILL.

~daYlHYtuH SPMtlitpl'
SENATOR HUNTER's LAND BILL.
We present to our readers to-day two admira-
BILE articles from the Richmond Enquirer, on
the subject of Senator Hunters land bill, to
which we invite their earnest attention:
HUNTERS LAND BILL.--An Executive veto
might have postponed the passage OF the Home
stead bill, but its ultimate triumph was inevi-
BILE and beyond any contingency OF Presiden-
tial opposition. The measure is precisely OF
the character to serve as an effective instru-
ment in the hand of the demagogue. Plausr
BILE in its pretensions and promising immense
benefits to the masses" tappeals with signal
effect to that active and noisy public sentiment
which controls the policy of the government.
But a short time since, it was introduced In
Congress amid almost universal execration, yet
so successfully has it propitiated popular favor,
that it now commands decisive majority, both
in the Senate and House of Representatives !;
and its passage, although embarrassed by the
suspicion Of Executive hostility, has been de-
feated by the extraordinary exertions of an en-
ergetic and vigilant opposition.
In this conjuncture, foreseeing the eventual
triumph of the Homestead bill, and anxious to
mitigate its mischievous operation by some
compromising benefit and by suppressing its
more pernicious principles, Senator Hunter
proposed the scheme for the final disposition
OF the public lands. The measure passed the
Senate with extraordinary unanimity- only
eleven votes in the negative and of these not
one from the democratic party.
In all frankness, we confess that that there
are features in Mr.. Hunters bill which we can
not approve But recent experience has re-
Taxed something of our exclusive and rigid adj
herence to the theory, and has taught Us to
accept compromise of principle if necessary
to escape absolute and overwhelming defeat.
1t is equally unjust and absurd to pass sen.
tence on any measure of public policy in re-
ference only to its own abstract excellence or
deficiency. This is emphatically true Of Mr.
Hunters substitute for the Homestead BILL
That measure neither pretends to theoretical
absolute benefit. 1t is avowedly an expedient
by which measure of great and unmixed evil
is defeated, and superseded by measure which
asserts no pernicious principle, and which
atones for necessary imperfection by ndispu-
table and essential advantages. 1t is in this
relation that we must consider the bill. To
contrast it with some scheme of ideal excel
lence and to condemn it because it falls short
Of our arbitrary standard, is either to betray q
very illiberal spirit or very perverted judg-
ment. We are not to consider whether it would
be possible, under the most favorable circum-
stances to project better plan, but whether In
the present emergency one could be devised so
well adapted to serve its purpose, SO certain OF
success, and so little mutiated by unwise and
pernicious provisions. Is Dir. Hunters sub
stitute less obnoxious than the original Home
stead bill? This is the issue-that the alter
native. We do not propose at present to ex-
haust the argument on this measure, but simply
to recommend it to the favor of the south By
indicating some points of advantageous COM
parison with the original bill.
In the first place, and this is sufficient of it.
self to determine the issue, Mr.. Hunters sub
stitute saves the country from that mischievous
principle Of the Homestead bill which asserts
i to be the duty Of government to supply the
wants Of the lazy and improvident. 1t may be
that the substitute exacts a tri6ing compensa-
ton, but even a nominal compensation ex
eludes the agrarian idea of Stand to the land
Tess"
The benefit of the Homestead bill was not
restricted to the citizens of this country, but
being freely extended to the alien. would have
impaired an extraordinary stimulus to immi
grafton, and have speedily subjected the south
TO the irresistible preponderance Of the north
Mr.. Hunters bill confines its benefits to such
as may avail themselves of the privileges Of the
present system.
The Homestead bill squandered the public
domain, on unworthy objects and for mischiev
ous purposes, without any possibility Of equiva
lent advantage. Mr. Hunters scheme, by Civ
ing right Of pre-emption to the States, by de
manding compensation for homesteads, and by
a iudicious graduation of the prices Of the pub
lie lands, not only appropriates them to wis'
purposes, but insures more profitable return
TO the treasury than under the present system.
But the great advantage Of Mr.. Hunters bill
that which distinguishes it SO favorably from
every other kindred measure, and commend
il so forcibly to the appreciation of the country
ia its effect in Withdrawing the question of th,
disposition of the public lands from the halls o
Congress, and from the contentious Of fedora
politics. As far back as 1886, when Mr.. Cal
boun proposed plan for the cession of tn
public lands, very similar to Mr.. Hunters bill
inst great statesman held this language:
aesire that this government shall cease to holt
the relation of landlord. | wish TO draw thi
gread fund" the public lands "out of th,
vortex Of the Presidential contest. The coun
try has been sufficiently agitated, debased ant
corrupted by the influence Of that contest
aeek 20 remove the immense amount Of patron
age connected with the management Of this do
rain. ] seek TO counteract the centralism
which is the great danger of this government
and thereby 70 preserve the liabilities ofthe peo
ole.p These results, 30 anxiousiy anticipated
by Mr.. Calhoun in 1886, are all accomplished
By Mr.. Hunters bill.
Besides as effect as measure Of legislation
Mr.. Hunters bill will render an important ger
vice to the country in preserving the organize
ton md ascendency OF the democratic party
whether the Homestead bill had been approves
or rejected by the President, schism in tn
party would have been the inevitable conse
auence. But Mr.. Hunter has happily parriec
the blow, and by presenting measure npoI
which the whole party will unite, as indicated
by the unanimous democratic vote Of the Sen
ate. has won triumph in the very extremit
Of division and defeat. Nor is this all. With
out sny sacrifice Of principle or consistency
he has attached the democracy of the north Z
the interests Of the south BY the strongest obi
cations of gratitude They have ever been GU