Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-02-25

ubc lands still remaining unentered and would require
at least ten years to carry it into execution He re.
ated the committee in favor of certain modca
tons ofhe bounty land laws but could not support the
bill now pending.
The question being the motion that the bill be laid
the table
Mr.. PRESTON by consent, introduced bill to en-
large the Louisville and Portland Canal provide for
control and management and to make said canal free
navigation and commerce; which read twice and
ferred to the Committee on Roads and Canals.
THE HOMESTEAD BILL-NEBRAsKA TERRITORY.
The House then went into Committee of the.Whoe on
the state of the Union, r oLDs Of Ohio in the chair
and resumed the consideration of the special order being
the bill encourage agriculture commerce. manufactures
and oil other branches of industry by granting every
man who is the head of family and citizen Of the
United States homestead Of hundred and sixty
acres Of land out of the public domain upon condition OF
occupancy and cultivation Of the same for the period herein
specified. .
Mr. JAMES C. ALLEN said that he had sought the
floor for the purpose of addressing the committee the
bill to organize Territorial Governments for Nebraska
and Kansas not however to speak to the necessity Of
the measure, but to submit some remarks that fea
ture of the bill which seemed excite the fears of
and the indignation Of others in this well in the
other end of the Capitol He alluded that provision
which Missouri compromise being ncon-
sstent with the principle of by Congress
In the States and Territories recognised by the
1850 is therefore imperative and void As Of the
Representatives from free State he desired that the
House and country should understand the grounds
which he gave his support the BILL and particularly
that clause to which he had alluded
1t was urged at the time the Missouri compromise was
under consideration that it would quiet the country and
satisfy both the North and South and thus prevent all
future agitation the subject of slavery. Although it
served for time to allay excitement, yet the country
had since had abundant evidence that it did
the purpose for which intended and owing the
principle upon which it based in his opinion never
could One of the great objects of this compromise
to prohibit slavery north of the line of So 30 north
latitude only long that portion of the country
should retain its Territorial character but after it
should take its rank independent State. The doc
tne that Congress had any such power this now
exploded being altogether inconsistent with State
eregnty and but few statesmen, any could be found
that would advocate it.
Mr. A. then replied to the assertion that Mr.. Clay was
the author of the of 1920 and said that unfortu-
natey for those who had sought to bring his influence
bear against this BILL it had turned out that he nei
ther the author of that compromise favorable the
principle upon which it was based.
He advocated the principle of n-interventon esab-
lshed by the compromise of $780, and declared that if
Congress should pass the bill pending in the Senate
it would forever settle that principle and be the
withdrawing this agtatng question from the halls of le
gislaton and leaving it with the people, to whom it be-
1onged Thus agitation the part Of the aboltioniss
would be closed and Congress would to become the
centre from which to radiae their political heresies
He then proceeded to show that the Missouri compro
mise utterly inconsistent with that of 1850 and de-
MED that it the purpose of the bill which he was adj
vocang establish slavery in the territories to which it
related If this its purpose he should be bound
oppose for the very that he supported it.
MIR. DENT then earnestly opposed the Homestead bill
He contended that before egslang for foreign paupers
we should take care Of household and provide
for those who had aided US to acquire these lands.
Mr. GROW followed, in reply, and set forth the bene-
fits which would result from the adoption of the BILL
Mr.. SMITH, of Virginia, briefly stated his objections
to the b and utterly denied the power of the Govern
ment to give away the property of the Union
Mr. SMITH, of New York. followed, and advocated
the bill because he sad in the view which he took of it.
it was an admission that the Government did own
these lands, and that the landless did.
The hour of three o'clock having arrived to which the
debate had been limited by the House
Mr.. DAWSON, as the member reporting the measure
under consideration, made brief reply the objections
which had been urged against the bill.
The committee then rose.
And the House resumed the consideration of the bill
extending the provisions OF the several laws granting
bounty lands to the officers and soldiers who have been
engaged in the military service Of the United States the
question being the motion that it be laid the table
And the question being taken, the motion was dis
agreed to: Ayes sc, 70.
The bill then referred to the Committee of the
Whole on the state Of the Union.
Mr. WRIGHT, OF Pennsylvania said that
was the I'D of February the anniversary of the birthday
Of Washington he would move that when the House ad
journ to-day it adjourn to meet on Thursday next.
Mr.. FLORENCE desired to know if il would be in order
to move to amend the motion to direct the Clerk
the opening Of the House tomorrow read from the
desk Washingtons Farewell Address?
The SPEAKER replied II would not be in order.
The question then taken the motion of Mr..
WRIGHT and it was agreed to, DIVISION lie in the
affirmative, 81 in the negative.
Mr.. HAVEN suggested that as the House had agreed
to adjourn tomorrow, they proceed clear
Speakers table, and made a,motion that effect.
Pending which the House al ourned.