Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1854-05-13


even stronger precedents for this act than those nave
named James Madison and the Congress OF 1917 40 not
have been troubled with any OF these modern con-
stitutiona quirks which forbade their appropriatng
$50 900 from the National Treasury for the relief OF cit
zens of Venezuela who left destitute ana starving
from the ravages OF terrific earthquake Nor did James
r. Polk and the Congress OF lS47 get into their heads
any these constitutional crochets which inhibited their
authorizing the employment of the vessels OF the Govern
transport provisions to the starving poor OF Scot
land and Ireland during the great famine Of that time
which desonted those countries Nor had IT then become
fashionable or esteemed peculiarly smart and chiyarous
impue to the advocates of those benevolent and noble
and generous and nagnanimous acts the weakness OF
"sickly sentmentay, or the want OF manly ndepen-
dence spirit in manifesng measure Of sympathy
with human suffering. Those acts also were for objects
of beneyoence and charity.
And now ask again. it constitutional TO re-
eye the distressed and starving people of foreign nations
by appropriations of money and the employment of Gov
ships; and is it unconstitutional to alleviate the
INDECENT and distressed citizens Of own country by
grant Of the public lands to the several States for
poser The absurdty Of the proposition implied IN the
inquiry furnishes its most significant answer.
If constitutional question is to be regarded as
practically and fully settled by contemporaneous egsa-
on ant by long series of successive Legislative acts IN
voving the question, acquiesced inc and approved
by oil the departments Of the Government would seem
that this question had been settled beyond controversy
Grants cf the public lands to particular State Tor spe
cfc Objects and for almost every conceivable purpose
mark the history your legislation from early period
after thu adoption Of the Constitution Aside from orr
gnal reservations, there are now standing upon your
statute books more than one hundred ACTS running
through period Of half century, making and regulat-
ing grants of the public lands particular States for
educational purposes alone than hfy for purposes
of internal improvement; than twenty-five for
State and county seats saying nothing about innu-
merabe grants individuals and private corporations
The aggregate Of grants to the States and Terrific
res amounted at the close of the last fiscal accord
ing the report of the Land Office, to more than one
hundred and twenty mons of acres, and for al
most every variety of object much larger amount has
been granted in instances to single States than the
whole amount embraced in this bill for distribution
among all the States These acts have been passed by
every Congress approved by every President from
early period of the Government out of the hundreds
of acts which have passed the two Houses of Congress-
running through every Administration from the beginning
OF the present century, granting lands to certain States
for different purposes within my recollection
has been arrested by the Executive till
this present instance The exercise of the power and the
purposes OF the grants have been limited only by the
judgment and discretion of Congress questions Of
pedency. Among the vast number Of bills of this de-
scrption, is it not somewhat remarkable that the
should fall upon the first bill of all this series Of
which makes grant of land directly for the benefit Of
all the States in just and equitable proportions and for
an object of great and conceded merit-a bill, too
which, to the extent Of its relief the burden taxa
to for the support of the INDECENT insane carries its
benefits directly to the whole people? II this bill is
constitutional, pray tell what land bill has Congress
ever passed that is constitutional And tell me- further
more wherein is the distinction to be drawn against
this be wrong?
am aware of the common argument in favor of the
constitutionay of the large grants which have been
made to portion Of the States for educational purposes
internal improvements State and county seats Of grants
OF sanes and of swamp lands the States in which they
are situated, and which have actually swasped good
portion Of your public domain of your grants of alter
nate sections for railroads and of your proposed grant of
hundred and sixty Of land for actual settlement
and occupation to each of all the poor and andess
am well aware that all these grants justified upon
tne assumption OF compensatng equvaentto the Gene
raj Government by the enhanced value of the residue of
the lands Admitting this assumption be true in point
actual experience has shown otherwise
In many nstancesthe argument goes only the polcy
the Congress make grants We are
now considering the question of constitutional power The
point 49, whether the power exists whether it has
oeen properly or improperly exercised This very argu-
ment TINS plea OF Justification, if may SO call it, ad-
mes the power 70 Its fullest extent The power which
grant lands for university in Mississippi can grant
lands for university in Vermont The power which can
grant lands Tor railroad in Illinois grant lands for
railroad IN New York The power which authorizes YOU
to grant lands for any ecifc object one State autho
rizes you to grant andsfor like object ayery State
II have power to grant lands for the beneG of the
INDECENT sane, as in the socaed homestead bill, you have
certainly equal power grant lands the benefit Of the
INDECENT insane, as in this bill If there be any distnc
ton in principle against this BILL would like to have
it pointed II the power exists at ALL it exists with
Out limitation MS to particular States particular OBJ
Jects the power exists at ALL the extent to which it
shall be exercised and the purpose which it shall be
exeIclse rest exclusively the discretion and Judgment
Oh Congress- with whom, under the Constitution the
power is lodged The inquiry with me- then is in refer
ence to any measure of this Sort is it expedient is it
proper is it rght does the public interest require it
will the public good be advanced by it? Whether given
measure be expedent not whether Congress have
authority to pass itor not presents entire
y distinct and Independent questions The one depends
upon considerations of public policy of public Interest,"
the other depends upon the construction of the Const
tuition.
Mr. President, readily admit the claims the superior
Claims II you please Of the States large and be
raj grants or the public lands internal
for educational and many other purposes This admis
sion 10 made upon the ground of the greater necessity in
their case, not because of any constitutional limitation of
the power which would restrict to make grants to the
land States only Entertaining and acting upon these
VIEWS am able, standing here say my friends from
the new States that have pretty uniformly voted for
about every thing you have asked for and your demands
have been neither few small" Ihave done so as
matter OF matter of justice if you please
50 to have as matter of the pressing necessity
growing out OF your peculiar position as new and rising
empires in this great Republic of ours have done So
however, without by any MEANS admitting SO absurd
doctrine that the Constitution coners upon Congress
an authority to do for you and your States what it
not do for any and for every other State in this Union
II the Constitution confers power upon grant lands
to the new States for internal Improvement educational
and other purposes coners equal power upon
the same thing for all the other States But whether it
would be expeden and wise, and proper do it the
same extent IN the the other must depend
upon the different circumstances and condition Of the old
and the new States and belongs to Congress make
the discrimination decide which require the more and
which the less The whole thing is resolved into ques