The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-01-01
SENATOR FITCH'S SPEECH.

of the speech OF Hon. u n. Fitch, OF Indiana, de
livered in the Senate on the odd ult We complete
as it We're, this report by giving this morning the
very interesting discussion which followed the
speech between Senators Fitch and Douglas. II
appears to be conceded on all sides that both in the
speech and in the discussion, Mr.. Fitch has not only
fully sustained the brilliant reputation which pre-
coded him to Washington, but has fully met public
expectation high that expectation had been raised
His calm reasoning, clear statements, powerful argu-
ments, and forcible appeals will do much to remove
those clouds of errors and preudices with which
dcmagogues and fanatics have enveoped question
which should only be met by the aid Of consttl-
tona light and in the largest spirit of enlightened
patriotism. This last powerful effort Of the gifted
senator from Indiana will be read with interest and
profit by thousands Of his fellow-citizens in every
section Of the Union.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROCEEDS or THE PUB,
Lie LANDS.
At the close of the revolution, the whole territory
east Of the Mississippi except Florida belonged to
some one of the States TO pay the debts which
had been contracted by the Congress on account Of
the war and those assumed which had been incur
red by the States to sustain the common cause and
to aid in meeting the expenses Of the new govern
ment, The following cessons were made, to wit BY
New York in 1851 Virginia in 1854 Massachusetts
in 1856; Connecticut in 1856, and South Carolina in
1877, to the government during the confederation ;
and by North Carolina in 1890, and Georgia in 802
to the new government, after the formation and
adoption of the constitution These cessons included
the territory now embraced in the States of Missis
sippi, Alabama, Tennessee Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana
Michigan, and Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota. 1t
is also contended by that these cessons extended
north of Missouri,to the Pacific, including Oregon
and Washington and the territory between them and
the Mississippi river
Since these cessions we have acquired by treaty
Florida and Louisiana, with an indefinite extension
North and Vest as well California anal New Mexico
We have perfect and undsputed title to Oregon and
Washington, but whether acquired under old Brit
sh grants, by purchase from Louisiana, or by dis
covery OF by all three, has been the subject of diff
fering opinions. All these acquisitions, whether
from the States or foreign governments, or other
wise, were subject to the right Of occupancy more
or less extensive, by the native Indians, which,
through numerous treaties, has been ""s'rs uishea
by payments from.~a common treasury. The con-
s;asraton for all these purchases has been drawn
from the treasury without reference to the source
from which the money was derived, though it is
known to have been mainly from the customs Ger
tainly so in the first instance 1t is disputed ques
ton, whether our public lands, on the whole, have
produced us more than their cost, which properly
the expense of surveys and SALE OF terrific
rial governments, of the wars and military charges
they have occasioned, and also the interest upon
these various expenditures. 1t would require a
more skilful accountant than to settle demon
strativey this point, though we suspect, if an accu-
rate statement were made there would be little left
standing to the credit OF our land account
But. with our views, this point is not of control
ling Importance indeed, very little should be at
tached to it. No denies that it is lawful ior the
national government TO receive, hold and use all the
income derived from the sales OF the public lands,
however they may have been acquired. 1t has a e-
pal right to continue to do what it has done ever
since the acquisition Of the different parcels. Its
laws of Congress, has been universally admitted.
Does there exist an adverse claim in relation to the
proceeds of the sales? small party insists that
such right does exist in the several States Whence
ia it derived? 1t not found condition of the ces
sons made by the States in acquisitions is it
among the stipuations entered into with foreign
governments or the Indian tribes. No trust has
been created, by words implication which is bind
ing upon the federal government, requiring that
distribution Of all any part of the revenues de-
rived from the public lands shall be made. The
States in their cessons, specified trust in their
own favor there was declaration of such trust
by the national governments there is no pretence
that a fraud was committed by the latter upon the
cedng States which induced them to part with their
legal title which equity could or ought to restore
1t cannot be alleged that the national government is
misapplying the funds derived from the cessions,
for the reason that they have been applied only in
strict conformity with law The acquisitions from
foreign governments have been obtained by the use
of means drawn from the national treasury, and
there is nothing anywhere tending to show that the
moneys derived from the sales of lands ought not to
be paid into it. The purchase was made for The COM
mon benefit and with our common means. II proht-
able the nationis entitled to all the profit that may ac
crue and If there shall be losses resulting thererom
the national treasury alone must support and bear
.,t,., aS n frltl