Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1854-04-08
SPEECH OF Mr.. BENJAMIN,

discussion to arise upon the principles of these
ures to-day; but have been so much surprised at
the principles advanced by the Senator from Geor;
gia, [Mr. Dawson,l and the Senator from Delaware,
Mr. Clayton,l that inasmuch my constituents are
deeply interested i'll this whole class of neasures
feel it necessary to say few words. conceive
that the opposition to these bills proceeds altogether
upon a false theory. hear gentlemen speaking OF
appropriations of public lands and comparing them
to appropriations of public money 1t strikes me
that we ought in order to arrive at Just idea OF
the principles upon which all these bills found
ed to make distinction between the Government
of the United States as political body governing
the country, and the Government of the United
States owner of lands
Now, sir when appropriation is asked for upon
the Atlantic upon the Gulf coast, and when 1t Is
proposed that the Government Government,
shall appropriate public moneys for purposes OF pup
lie improvement, necessarily, that work beng m
tended to be done by the Government alone not De-
ing controlled in any measure whatever by private
enterprise private judgment, the individuals VINO
take part in the railroads not taking part IN thoSe
works not investing their capital in them, not hav-
ing any of the stimuli to economy and prudence and
Judgment in expanding the money, which, under
other circumstances, are applied to these SUBJECTS
necessarily say, in appropriations OF that charac-
ter it is right and is proper that when the appro-
priations are asked for they should be granted only
after close examination, and that the expenditure OF
these appropriations should be properly guarded by
the officers of the Government of the United States
But when the Government land owner, and
not as Government, is called upon to contribute,
with other land owners to the improvement of its
property, then sir, different class OF conslde
rations necessarily arise, and which cannot with
any propriety be assimilated with those which gen.
t!emen evoked before for the purpose of checking
action upon the subject of the public lands
Suppose any one of US to be possessed of large
tracts of wild land Take the example of the Sena-
tor. from Texas. Suppose any one of us to be pos
sessed in individual right of large tracts of wild
land land that cannot sell, land that is ntrinsi-
cally valuable because it is fertile, land which will
produce much when cultivated by the labor of man,
but land that in its actual position is vaucless to
us as a of wealth revenue; suppose, under
these circumstances, the proposition were made to
us by capitalist to come upon our lands, and i'm
prove them by putting constructions upon them,
or by building roads through them, and suppose the
parties making the proposition could prove, not by
mere estimates made in advance, but by the opera
ton of principle already tested by experience, that
if we would allow them to expend their capital upon
our property, and then divide the property with |
them, the half that would remain for us could be
sold for more than as much as the whole would have
brought before what would be the answer of any |
man administering his own property with just re-
gard to his own interest to proposition of that |
kind Would he not accept it at once?
What, then, can be said when the whole extent of
the proposition in favor of the States is simply
to devote portion of your lands to make the rest
sell for larger price? You are land proprietor
in the States and you more land than all
the citizens together. Now join these citizens in
common public improvement and your property
will be improved we'll as theirs. 1t is not just it
tent with equity to call upon the citizens of the new
States to build railroads through lands belonging to
the Government, and then that the Government
should sell the lands at greatly enhanced price
price produced at the cost of the citizens of those
States In the old States, where the Government
owns lands, necessarily it cannot be called upon (
for these appropriations. Why? Because the di-
rect benefit resulting from the expenditure of the
appropriation does not nurc to the benefit of the
General Government Butn the States, where
the General Government owns the land, and where
the principle goes to this extent and further
where one half shall be appropriated for these pur
poses to make the remaining half moro valuable than
the whole was before. l am scarcely able to under
stand the difficulty of the Senator from Georgia. who
thinks such measure would be squandering away
of the public lands Why? The lands go for the
benefit of all the States The half appropriated
for these improvements goes of course to the bene
tit OF the improvement ITSELF but the other half
HANGED in value, and selling for more than the whole
would have been sold for before, comes into the
market The proceeds of the public lands arc
brought into the public Treasury, and they ex-
pended for the benefit of the whole Union-for the
old States as well as the new.
1, for one, not alarmed by this cry of there
being one hundred and six railroad bills l wish
there were thousand and six instead of one hun
dred and six. l wish they could be multiplied
throughout the whole extent of the West and
through every part of the country where the Gov
eminent possesses public lands. If the system of
railroads could be scattered throughout the whole
of our western country the lands could be brought
INTO cuitiVaton oy DelnS brought within the reach
OF market by this system of internal improvements;
If the hardy and Industrious population can be
spread over these lands say that they would be
source OF benefit, not only to the States but to
the whole Union, to the constituents represented by
the Senators from Delaware and Georgia far great
er than can be obtained by any other system you
can devise One hundred and six railroads! One
hundred and SIX bills, VIC told call FOR $780,
100000. According to my judgment, the proper
wayto state the proposition would be one hundred
and SIX railroads, providing for increasing the
wealth OF the country to the extent of 700 900 0OO
II they appropriate that quantity for that purpose
believe this system of appropriation to be
source OF public wealth, and not a squandering of
the public funds. believe, with the Senator from
Texas, that no system has been devised in modern
times, by which the wealth, the prosperity and the
increase of this country have been so well secured
as by the system of giving portion of the public
lands for purposes of internal improvements so as to
add value to the rest.
did not intend to say word upon this subject
but think the whole principle has been misappied
was going to say had been misunderstood, Nbut
cannot suppose that to be the with Senators as
and distinguished as those who have
spoken But really think that the true principle
has not been stated; that it is appropriation
OF public money It is not to be compared to the
case of the improvement of harbors and rivers where
the Government Government spends the mon
ey of the whole people l think that a distinction
Is to be mad, between the Government as a politi-
cal body, governing the country, and the Govern
ment as land-holder and landowner of part of the
land through which these improvements pass 1t
is the Government as land holder and Landowners
joining with other land-holders and land owners5 in
making this vast public improvement.
THE PUBLIC LANDS
Last week submitted some remarks in relation
to the true policy to be pursued by the General Gov