The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1854-03-14


gwen IT, from the lime you first exercised authority over
The public lands down to the present hour.
My colleague talked about this being the FIRST instance
States IN which II lies What did you do when you CAV
away hfleen twenty millions OF acresperhaps
certainly not less-o soldiers OF whom or eight
lhousandperhsps more perhaps twenty ihousand.were
IN the State OF New York, and went TO the land States
and located their lands there Was that giving lands 10
the Staesn which they lie No more than this is Civ
iug lands to the States in which they lie In that case
you Issued scrip TO the twenty thousand discharged SOL
deTs In New York. and they sold the scrip, or located II
IN the new States Here you propose 10 give the State
of New York seven or eight hundred thousand, or NIL
lion acres oil land IN scrip, and she will locate II IN pre-
csely The same way Then, | want TO know where IS
the distinction between the two cases You issued (say
hfteen millions OF In scrip TO the soldiers IN New
York and Pennsylvania and they have gone and located
their scrip in Wisconsin. Iowa, Minnesota, and The other
new States and Territories Now you propose TO issue
70 those States (sa) Two millions OF scrip under Tins bill
What is the distinction between the two cases ask
my honorable colleague how can he draw distinction
II is true in the scrip issued to individuals
living out Of the land States; but those individuals sold
other individuals Who went and located il and
here you scrip directly TO the States but the States
sell individuals and the individuals at last locate il
in the States, and settle on the lands SO that the
effect on the land precisely The in both cases. and
the principle involved so lar as can see is precisely the
same.
Having turned this question over in my mind and hav-
ing viewed it in every aspect in which can be looked
upon, have TO the conclusion that reasonable
obstacle stand in the way OF passing this bill on the
suggested by The argument of my colleague, why
may vote for The bill tt
hod that the old States have an interest in this land
an interest which we recognise, and which are
bound TO recognise; which practically recognise in
the very act OF coming here and asking them to vote to
give us land Tor our railroads will not ask The old
States 10 yield their interest 10 me Tor railroad purposes
and for the purpose of fencing out the floods OF the Mis-
sssippi river, and other western and southwestern
streams; will not ask Them give up their interest in the
swamp lands will not ask them TO give up their interest
fA afa thn IRON q
granting her the sixteenth section OF public land IN every
township for school purposes; will not ask OF them to
surrender their interest 10 promote the interest oil my
Sate and Then turn upon them and say 81 will moi vote
you solitary OF this land tor any purpose within
the limits OF your States" While will be generous to
myself, generous even to afaulto my own constituency
will at least be just to those who have an interest IN
these lands like that OF the people whom represent
do not however rise to discuss this question again
My colleague will certainly understand me as not pre-
senling my views IN reply to him. in any sp OF con,
troversy; but wish to justify the vote which shall
give, and especially since my honorable colleague
will vote on the other side
but only 10 answer few points which have been made
by The honorable senator from Mississippi. will state
the distinction which take, and which think he has
msappeheDded II rs not tor me 10 account for the pre-.
yious legislation OF Congress | admitted, in the com.
mencemen OF my argument, that believed The general
power to dispose OF the public lands OF the nation was
precisely equivalent 10 the power 10 lay duties without
express limitation, or the power to make appropriations
out OF The treasury without express limitation, and that
The limitations on either power must arse by necessary
implications from the fact that The constitution founded a
government oil United powers and for limited purposes
and that you cannot make appropriation, either OF
land money Tor purpose not within The intent and
jurisdiction OF mat constitution.
Now, sir said supposed the distinction to the ap
preparation OF lands IN favor OF the States in which they
lie, by reseving every sixteenth section Tor school pur
poses and in other respects. was on The principle OF
andholder. man owning large quantity OF land, and
desiring 10 sell IL, lays II on with those publIc con-
venences ana with those arrangements IN detail which
he thinks calculated TO produce sale OF the residue OF
the lands He lays public streets He every
section Tor school purposes His object is 10 in
duce he community 10 buy the residue OF hls land. and
that, suppose is the foundation which the govern
ment did this
Ii is not gift, therefore, but is exercise OF the alb
soue power oil disposal which rests 10 the government
with view 10 the interests OF the government because
il promotes the sale OF the lands
The thing is true regards the swamp lands. II
we make a contract with an individual in th "a
way: elf you will drain certain quantity OF land, we
will give you ceraln quany; or you wall drain the
swamp lands, you can have them," we should have a
right do so Tor The effect would be to induce the indi
vdual to dalH the aDd and benefit the residue oi
the land OF the lasdhoder Clearly that rs not gilt
There consideration in the duty performed, and the
object is the benefit OF the landhoder and that IN my
judgment. iuslihes the purpose for which II is done. az
well as the exercise OF the power The power do not
doubt for moment ] do not question your power 10
dis pose OF the public lands unimedy. only say that
you violate the constitution when you dispose of them
ard apply the proceeds TO purpose not within the lutis
dlcon OF The federal government
Mr.. ADAMS obtained the floor, but yielded to a mo-
ton to postpone, ia order to go into executive session