Daily national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1854, 1854-04-18
published BY REQUEST
THE PUBLIC LANDs-MR BENEFITS MIN0RI-
TY REPORT

=
TX REPORT.
The undersigned, member OF the Commit
tee on Public Lands, dissents from the argu-
ments and conclusions of the foregoing report
against granting lands to the several States for
tho benefit Of tho INDECENT insane, being Of
opinion that Congress has the authority to do
this and would act wisely and properly 10 APP
plying = portion Of the public lands to 30 hn-
name and commendable purpose.
The objections to il, as unconstitutional and
fnerpedient, are believed to be equally untena-
ble
LAS TO THE POWER OF CONGRESS.
This is given in express terms by the Sd
section Of article Of the Constitution OF tho
United States, viz
of and make all needfnl rules and regulations
respecting, the territory and other property Of
the United States and nothing in this Consti
Triton shall be 30 construed AZ to prejudice any
claims Of the United States, or Of any particu
lar Ssate.u
More broad and comprehensive terms are
not to be found in the English language than
those which arc employed to givo this power to
Congress.
Webster defines ITO dispose Of as follows
I" To part with to ALLEVIATE; to sell; to best0w !;
to give away; to transfer by authority"
Johnson's definition Of the term Ito dispose
Of" is, ito part with; to apply to any purpose;
to transfer to any other person or use; to put
into tho hands Of another; to give away; to
put away by any Means
The existence Of this power by Congress- to
dispose of the public lands ia conceded, and
has always been exercised. But it seems now
to be claimed that it is so limited in the Con-
stitution ms to prohibit grant in this case !;
that while the public lands may be constitu-
tionally disposed of to certain portion Of the
States by grants for railroads. and the like, to
dispose Of them for other purposes, or to the
other States, il unconstitutional; that they may
be disposed Of for almost any imaginary con-
siderakion, but cannot for purposes of great
public interest.
Those who assert and assume this--for it is
mere assertion and mption-ought at least
to DO able to point out the provision of the Con-
stitution containing the prohibition.
1t does not touch this question to talk long
or learnedly about this being Government Of
limited powers, and that each department
should be confined to tho authority conferred.
Here power is expressly given to Congress;
and tho question il, whether it is general, or
limited to particular class of cases.
1t is insisted, in reply to all objections of
this kind, that tho right of Congress to dispose
of the public lands is conferred by words of a
sense as general and comprehensive as any
that could have been used, and without any
limitation, except that contained in the same
clause, that nothing in this Constitution shall
be 80 construed as to prejudice any claims Of
the United States or Of any particular State"
To understand this restriction, it should DO
- ~ L. 1ock H. Ill kck~
including New York, Virginia, Massachusetts,,
and Connecticut-had granted and ccded the
public lands claimed by them to the United
North Carolina, Sonth Carolina, and Georgia,
these deeds of cession, that the land should be
I" a common fund for the use and benefit of all
tho Statesn
The restriction in the Constitution had ref
erence to this, and was intended to enforce it.
Its true meaning is to direct that Congress, in
dsposing Of the pnblic lands, should have due
regard to the rights Of all the States, and dis
pose Of them as their common property and
for their common benefit. The grant now pro-
posed to be made complies with this condition.
for it is general and just to all the States.
The power of Congress to dispose of the pub
lie lands is absolute and unqualified, subject
only to this restriction, (which has never been
regarded, and is, in this case, inapplicable.) 1t
may dispose Of them by any means, or for any
purpose, in regard to which it has power to
legislate, by sale or gift-in fact in any man.
ner it deems proper.
Ii this power exists at all, las is admitted, it
is a general and unlimited power Of disposal
Neither the manner in which, nor the purposes
for which, the public lands may be disposed
of are prescribed by the Constitution. 1t gives
broad and general power, Except the d.
rection to regard the claims Of oil the States
in its disposal) For what purpose they should
be granted is not question Of power, but Of
sound policy. This involves an inquiry, not
into the right Of Congress to make the grant,
(for that il clearly has, but into the expcdiency
and propricty Of making it for tho purpose de-
sired. IL was presumed Congress would dis
pose Of the lands in proper manner or this
power would not have been intrusted TO il. 1t
could not have been safely given to any other
department Of the Government; and it rests
upon the same ground a. the right Of Congress
TO dispose Of other property belonging to the
United States. But how can Congress have
the constitutional right to make grants to some
Of the Statce, and not to the others Tor to
grant lands to build railroad or a university,
and not on insane asylum Those who con-
tend for anything so absurd ought TO give a
reason for 1t; yet mono has been advanced.
Has TO PREcEDENTs AND PRACTICE.
Congress hiss exercised the power Of grant
ing away and disposing Of the public lands
ever since the establishment Of the Govern.
ment and it's acts have been approved and
sanctioned by the Executive and Judiciary De-
partments under every President, and 10 all
the courts.
For moro than fifty years-under the ad
ministrations OF jefferson, Madison Monroe
Adams, Jackson, Van Buren,, Tyler, Polk, and
Fillmore Congress has been constantly ma
king grants of the public lands for almost every
conceivable object and purpose. All these acts
have been approved BY the Presidents, and
sanctioned and held valid and constitutional
by tho courts; and II was never found out they
were unconstitutional until now IL anything
can ever be settled, this power Of Congress
must NJ this day be 10 regarded