New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-05-11
SENATOR GREEN.

The speech made by Mr. Senator Green OF Mis-
souri, toward the close of Wednesdays debate on
the Homestead bill was rather remarkable specl-
men of Senatorial eloquence. First, the name
commonly applied to the bill, then its friends ana
supporters in Congress, and thirdly those Tor
whose special benefit it is intended all came in for
their full share of the Senator's yiruent abuse
There seems to be something in the term
Homestead" which CRATES very harshly on the
oar of Senator Green. At all events he denounced
the application of that term to this bill as lie,
fraud, Fan infamous attempt to deceive the public,
and those who give the bill that title as "iniam0ns
nous panderers" to " vtiated public sentiment.
The friends of the bill he described " as broken
" down politicians, ready to catch at every straw,
;ts intended benefciaries US " worthcss scopn-
" drels. who never earned dollar in their lives
and never WILL" and the bill itself, as Whole
sale piece of plumber, which, IL IL passed.,
would make the Government " an encouraser vi
" laziness and want of thrift" Such are the terms
in which this slayeholdng Senator describes 'nat
great body of hardy and laboroas men who III The
hone of securing home and farm for themselves
pryations incident to settlement OH the frontier.
Not content with all this, the Senator, in the
ecstacy of his passion against land ort the landless
and homes for the homeless, goes still further he
denounces the bill Us piece of robbery, ana US
striking at the root of all government, by taking
property from some and giving it away to others.
To make out this point, lie sets up the idea that
4ha rir no
but the property Of the citizens individually, and
of him Mr.. Green among the rest; and he lndlg-
nantly asks, "What is there honest and truthful IN
taking my property and giving it away to some
"poor. infamous sc0undrel Z" But if Mr.. Green
has n private and personal interest in the public
lands. the same is true of all other citizens just
az true of the frontier settler to whom he applies
such contcmptuous and disparaging epithets as OF
the honorable Senator himself. In this view OF
the matter there is no gift in the case. Ii every
citizen has joint interest in the public lands,
then the Homestead bill is only the providing
process of PARTITION as it were, whereby this JOINT
interest may be severed, and particular interest
acquired by one of the joint owners in particular
quarter-section.
So far from being an encouragement to id!eness,
and thrdlessncss, the Homestead blu cannot bnt
operate as strong stimulus TO enterprise and in
dustry. The first settlement of new country Is
attended by special hardships and prlSatlonS, and
the settlement Of part of the lands gives great
additional value to the rest. The pioneers are
well entitled to some special advantages. Nobody
now questions the justice or rcasonablencss OF the
parf from no In
which it has sometimes been subjected by specula-
tors. But in its origin, that system encountered
the same objections which are now brought against
the free grant of lands to actual settlers The pre-
emption system often fails to meet the necessities
Of the case. The preGemptioncr is frequently
called upon to pay up before he has realized any
profits, and at the very moment when he needs all
the money he can possibly muster to put his land
efiectually into cultivation Too often, to raise
the requisite sum, he is obliged TO mortgage his
land to some graspng usurer, and the failure of
crop or two may change the ownership Of it.
Thus, in too many cases. the presumption system
proves mere trap, by which the over-sangune
settler is induced to occupy and improve, without
any ultimate benefit to himself.
Considering that the public lands have of late
years been given away so profusely to States,
railroad companies, and Old soldiers, it seems hard
that actual settlers should be overlooked in the
distribution. Every militia man, who, during the
last war; served for fourteen days, is entitled to his
land warrant, but can his claim be compared to
that of the actual settler who builds his house and
opens his farm in the midst of the virgin forest or
prairie
The contempt with which Mr.. Green speaks of
the landless and homeless ia characteristic of the
sayeholding spirit. In the same spirit, Mr.. Ham
mond spoke of our Northern laborers as the mud
sls of society. And yet it is to the labOring men
that these scornful aristocrats look to continue
their party and theAseyes in power.