Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1857-1858, 1857-04-02

OF THE
HON. JOHN BELL, OF TENNESSEE,

Disposition Of the Public Lands
Delivered in the U. S. Senate, Feb 27thand 2sth.
CONCLUDED.
propose now, sir, to trace briefly the history of
the policy of granting lands to aid in the construc-
uon OF railroads to the States. The first grants
were made with some limitations, which now appear
to be disregarded 1t was conceded that no such
gants should be made but to such roads as by their
connection with other roads, or with water commu-
nications, canals, lakes rivers would be of gen.
eral convenience and utility to the commerce of
| large sections or Of the whole country, clothing
them with the attribute of a national road or high
way; and no grant was held to be proper to aid in
the construction of roads merely for local advant-
ages and to benefit local trade and Intercourse.
| We have now lost sight of that consideration in
making these donations. :. No gentleman of the
strictest sect Of political Pharisees in this country
now interposes any objection on that score, or in-
quires whether the road proposed be aided is pa-
tona or is to be constructed for merely district or
local purposes.
! Again: when the question was pressed, six years
ago. why not grant land to the old States through
which these great national roads run, well as TO
that portion Of them which passes through the new
States? the representatives of the land States inn
| medately said No, we will never coucede the
principle that the lands shall be appropriated to any
object of public Improvement or any part or por
| ton of road which does not lie within the limits
of our own States" And this pretension, thus set
up by the new States, was yielded to. / make this
statement particularly in reference to the grant for
the Chicago and Mobile railroad When propO-
sition was made to give the benefits of that grant
to all the States through which the road ram the
whole of what is called the States-rights party in
this body took the position that under the Const-
tuition, we had no right to make these grants of
land, on any other ground than that they would
hance the value Of the public domain; assuming and
urging that had the constitutional right to exer
else the policy pursued by every private landholder
in the country, in making improvements on part
of it that we might sell the remainder to greater
advantage. So hard run were the sticklers for a
strict construction of the powers of Congress over
the public domain that they bad to plant themselves
that principle to justify their vote for these do
nations But they would make no grant to the States
which bad no public lands.
The idea of having the constitutional power to
exercise all the rights of a private landhoder in
managing the public domain singular one, at
least, for States-rghts to embrace; but it was
at best rather pretext than bona tide avowal of
a principle. There was, at least, but little sub
stance in it. 1t not in fact, well grounded in
respect to the large grant to the State of Illinois,
which was the pioneer of all the grants made to aid
in the construction of railroads but it answered the
purpose of loop-hole, through which those who
desired to be governed in their policy all ques
tons by strict and rigid construction Of the Con-
stitution could escape.
My friend from Michigan Mr.. Stuart must allow
me to make another remark in relation to the Min
nesota grant This bill was passed the other day
without any inquiry into its effect on the public do
main of the United States. The strictest constrCc-
tionists in this House permitted the bill to pass sab
sitentio contentng themselves with calling for the
yeas and nays, and voting against it. In that case
! the question of benefit TO the domain was wholly
cd. do in tn
no inquiry made as to the effect on the reserv-
ed alternate sections have not examined the de-
; tails of that bill, and my friend from Michigan will
correct me if | am wrong in my views in regard to
it, but / understand that it grants lands in aid OF
the construction of four roads running nearly upon
parallel lines through the Territory, and in some
parts of them running within twenty miles of each
other. So l am informed To say that is import
ant to make these grants the principle that they
enhance the public domain, is virtually and substan
tally thrown aside. Then we have no check for
these grants in the future and that pretext cannot
avail any longer for denying grants of public lands
to the other States of the Union.
maintain that it delusion 'pretext in
the case of the Illinois grant All the speeches
heard here on that subject, well as the notices
have taken in the public journals of the coun
try, vindcated that large grant to Illinois on the
ground that the grant, in that case amounting tC
three millions of acres, penetrated, rather inter
sected, large body of prairie lands in the interior
+ of that State, which had been neglected although
in the market for twenty or thirty years. and would
have the effect of making them marketable anC
saleabe, and thus bringing into the Treasury, az
very feD gears, more money than it would have re
ceived in ten perhaps twenty years. without sucf
8 grant. What was the lactg The gentleman whC
projected that road who perhaps controlled and in
fluenced the Legislature of Illinois, and who haC
sufficient influence to carry the grant through Con
gress brought it forward at the very moment of tint
, when private enterprise about to penetrate
intersect that long neglected region in the interior
of Illinois, by railroads running east and west.
do not know how many were projected of this de
scrpton; perhaps the Senator from Michigan Cal
II ! inform me.
Mr. Stuart 1t is impossible for me to do SO
; There is large number of railroads in Illinois.
. Mr.. Bell, of Tennessee. | say that the projec
was brought forward at the very moment wheI
private enterprise was about opening those land
+ without the aid OF any grant OF the public lands
and thus, sir the Government would have found
ready market for all the public lands in the interiO
d of Illinois, had the Chicago and Cairo road neye
been projected. 1t may be said, and perhaps witt
truth, that the large grant to this Central road
l. fastened its construction, and that the Government
= was thereby enabled TO derive a revenue from thu
" public lands in that particular region, sooner, b.
/ some few years. than it could have done by waiting
6 the construction of the roads projected to cas-
: and west But the Government could well wait
i We did not want the money; and we now feel tn
evil effects of Fastening the sale of these lands IL
our overlooking Treasury. dwell upon facts, &
II show that there is really nothing in the constitu
A tonal objection which has heretofore been urge
against donations of the public lands to the oil
States; or, at all events that there is real fore
in the principle assumed as justification for maxim
. such grants to the new States, in exclusion of tn
s old.
The Legislature of Illinois in that instance acted
perhaps, exactly as should have recommended ha
S been a member Of that body when Congress wa
n so liberal as to make such a grant as that. We ar
told that the Government of the United States ha
no right TO complain OF the advantage derived from
4 this grant by Illinois and the company which con
structed the road inasmuch as IL received fu
equivalent, in the sales of the alternate sections
for all the lands granted to that State Ii is argue
that we got $3.50 an acre for what was left OF tn
alternate sections reserved the line Of the road
p We might have got that price for the whole OF tn
: land. II private enterprise had only been left I
build the roads through that region of country. Tn
{ Illinois Central Railroad Company instead of getting
$500 an acre, as understand, has realized, or cal
readily realize from eight to twelve dollars per acr
/. on an average Of the lands granted by Congress
: But make no complaint; / take no exception 4
the large profits or advantages realized either b.
j Illinois or the railroad company from this grant
allude to the subject of them TO show how fut,
and how groundless is the allegation that the Gov
eminent is getting full equivalent for these grants
, The State Of Illinois, by the policy which she ha