Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-05-27

the incidents Of an absolute in feesmple
controlled by what known as the obligations Of good
faith controlled by what may be regarded the
influences or dictates Of sound discretion because these
are Influences which necessarily imply the duciary rea
ton which subsists between trustee and eesta qa
trust But, far as regards the naked power he says
Congress isn no wise responsible for it, except for its
judgment in reference the ends to be accomplished
the purposes that may be effected by dsposing of the
public lands in reference to the great ends for which the
Constitution instituted as proessed in the preamble
The grant being the source Of power makes Congress
the omnpotent Judge Of the subjects Of policy which
it shall operate and professions Of legitimate end will
be sufficient protection in the legal validity Of
transfer under IT, leaving the sphere Of abuse under it
without limitation and leaving the latitude Jurisdiction
without the penalty of transgression.
My honorable friend is disposed to separate that part
of the clause which gives Congress the power to dis
pose of the public lands property from that part
needul rules and regulations in relation to the public
lands Allow me to say that they cannot De separated
and if the power dispose of the territory property
Of the United States is exclusive and without limitation
the power to make all needfu rules and regulations
in respect the subject is also exclusive and with
out limitation
will impute the honorable Senator some Of the
views which others have taken of the power TO make all
needful rules and regulations IN regard to the puonc
lands. know these words have been tortured by poll
tcians give Congress jurisdiction by which 1t could
give the Territories governments entirely partial or OF
any character which might be dictated by Congress.
Carolina took that view, and have right to suppose
that he will take it. do hold him responsible for
the views which others may take upon the construction
of those words in the Constitution But sir 1t is not to
be disguised that in this view many contend under sec
tona feeling that Congress has right to prescribe what
government it peases the Territories, has right to
exclude this that form of government and to exclude
this that class OF property in other words that has
right say the South " You shall not go upon the
Territories with your property, and the North You
shall have exclusive dominion over them, according to
the opinions which you may entertain, and that too
dependant upon the decision of majority Of Congress
Ii the land in the public domain is be regarded as
property to be disposed of by Congress abso
lutte owner without any recognised restraint then Con-
in reference to the other wordsto make rules and
observation-disclosures political despot in prescribing
the laws for the government of Territory. If such
should be the opinion of Congress, majority becomes
the moulder of empires FIJI
Now, sir, the honorable Senator cannot separate the
two parts of the clause shall presently show They
ndissoube and far regards the power of Con-
gress they are in my opinion, equally subject to the
same limitations, and must be controlled by the
considerations The practice of the Government has
oeen in earlier tines to regard the whole clause Civ
Congress the Of taking care Of the public lands
md to make such rules and regulations would fac-
ate their sale and setementsales to individuals being
he initatory steps to lawful settlement Of them
hereby letting owners for consideration have TIE lands
md the Treasury to have the proceeds.
According to the strictly legal views which have been
AIKEN by my friend, Ia strictness full Of
Congress, under the grant, may, legsla
org, be responsible for the duty of making good laws
md may be accountable for mischevous legislation, but
no legal control i'll any process of alienation of the
ublic lands The deed may be good though the ends
be effected by it may be bad, and showing abuses full
dangers except to those who are Immediately benefit
d, making immediate benefits strong incentives to en-
arged policy, making discretion dispenser of bounes,
nth all the rights Of partially and the dispensaon from
he penalties of injustice
AS illustration Of the view entertained on this sub
ect it is fair to aude to the analogy perhaps dent
y in the incidents of private owner of land and Con-
,ress the absolute owner Of the public lands pri
rate owner is under restraint the freedom of
Alienation except in the positive prohibition of the laws
II the land These, in oil countries where the princi
lies of the law prevail give great dominion to
he proprietor with few restrictions upon his power of
enaton Resentment, injustice, caprice. and what is
omnvn, partiaity may 30 hie eeaneeors in tho dspos
ion of his estate. The father may select child to
he exclusion of others. The husband may show re-
sentiment to his lawful wife by intentional preference
Of another The worthy and devoted friend may be
cluded to provide for the false and decetfu atterer
Passion may rule for the day. leaving Judgment justice
to made Intellectual appeal but under circumstances
that forbid legal tribunal interfere Can Congress-
under the grant OF power referred to- do the things
with constitutional mpunity II to the extent of the
means afforded in the disposition of the public lands it
has despotc Jurisdiction and there is not much merit
seeing that under kind professions of beneyoence and
love for all Congress can and will play the part Of step
mother As guardian she cannot be just to minority
~
If interested majority. Under this view the public
ands must be disposed of by ascertaned majority or
~ combination of maorities. 1t has been said that
such has been the case and under this view Congress
nay give away land according to its notions Of policy
Ind suppose after all that is said with regard to what
called discretion, must refer to the conscience Of
he jurisdiction which exercises it, Some writer has said
hat conscience, high judge it is is liable to be
nsled There is advocate eloquent self interest
before this high but not nfallibe tribunal And when
he disposition of the public lands is committed to Con-
in the exercise of this naked grant, upon the suppo
on that has exclusive and therefore unlimited control
over them, there Is guide limitation but the dec
sion OF ON interested majority and you reduce this Gov
eminent, which supposed to be Of limited uris
dction, with enumerated and delegated powers, to the
condition. so far regards the administration of the
public lands of having despoc jurisdiction them,
as the object to be effected by their disposition the
purpose to which they may be directed limited only by
the positive prohibitions of the Constitution Now, there
are positive prohibitions to which may advert.
Congress were to undertake to take from the land in
Iowa and Wisconsin certain portions Of lands lying within
those States and erect the public lands thus situated into
State take it for granted Congress would not have
power under any provision of the Constitution how
plenary it might be in the terms of it,
with others because in referring Others it would be
found there was controlling all others that in
conflict with it and that is that Congress shall not erect
State within the jurisdiction Of another State make
two States out of one without the of the States
concerned and the consent Of Congress Them il Con-
should undertake to make such disposition Of the
public lands to erect State within Iowa. State
within Wisconsin, to make State out Of the public
lands of both, there would be positive prohibition and
limited and restricted thus showing that it is unsafe to
look exclusively without regard other provisions
Of the Constitution
There is another prohibition. If Congress