Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-03-30
Is, G6a635 s.,5sO,GU7

Total.... i, Obs s,,5sO6g7
repeat Mr. President, that this estimate is made
upon the assumption that the operations of sys-
TEN of land laws for the past year furnish a fair
guide IN Judging of their operations hereafter, and
upon the further conjecture that if the present bill
passes Its provisions viii induce twenty thousand
heads of families, annually to seek its benefits.
viii have occasion hereafter to state more fully the
reasons on which adopt this estimate to the in,
/ crease or settlement under the influence of the
pending measure. For the present adopt and pre-
sent IT by way of illustrating the practical working
of the policy which the present measure Is based.
Ii is apparent that upon the usual estimate Of five
individuals a family, the Government viii by this
bill furnish homes annually TO one hundred thousand
persons: and that without any other change in our
land policy we have public land sufficient to furnish
homes To a like number annually for a hundred
years 10 come. And this, too, cOntcmplates the con
tnuauCe of the grants under our donation, gradua-
ton. pre-emption, swamp. railroad, and military
bounty laws at the same rate at which they were
made during the past year.
But Mr.. President, are met heTe with the in
tcITogatOry; have we the constitutional authority
to enact he provisions of this bill into a law? Have
we the right in other words, to withdraw from
market and SAFE annually three million acres of the
public domain, to be appropriated to homesteads for
twenty thousand families upon the sole considCra-
ton of actual occupancy and cultivation Of their
respective quarter sections during period of five
wears This question Is entirely pertinent and If it
cannot be answered satisfactorily in the affirmative
the bin oughrto be rejected shall proceed there
fore. to state the grounds on which my own mind
rcpocs upon the CONNECTION that the bill is not only
In perfect harmony with existing land policy, but
entirely consistent with tie Constitution.
In discussing the powers of Congress over the
public lands ii Is customary. Mr. President, TO look
alone TO the clause in the Constitution which COuters
upon Congress power to dispose Of and to make all
necdtu rules and regulations IN respect 70 the ter
rItOrv SO fan as those lands are concerned. which
had been cedcl to the United States at the time the
Constitution was formed. or which were then cX-
pected 20 be soon Ceded no doubt he entertained
that tins clause Intended to confer on Congress
its powers for their disposition and government.
But in constituting this clause, with view of ascer-
tanning the character and extent of the powers con-
fcTrel il is necessary to consider the language of
the Constitution in connection with the terms con-
tanned in the deeds of CessIun. IL Is matter Of his
tory that these cessIOus grew out Of serious con-
uOversv among those States which had To waste
laris within their limits and those which had to
the disposition which ought TO be made Of them at
the close of the revolutionary war The question
was. whether they should be the exclusive property
of the states within whose limits they were situa-
ted. OF whether they should be regarded as common
property Of all the States uponthc ground that they
had been acquired IN "a common cause. and by the
JOINT tolls and sacrifices and expenditures of all the
States The fact that ali OF the States were heavily
burdenCG with the revolutionary debt. gave to the
controversy lis chief interest To quiet the dispute
the Congress of the Confederation in 1850. recon-
mended to tine States within whose geographical
boundaries the waste lands were situated to cpdt
and reinUulsh their claims to the United States TO
be- disposed of for tIc common benefit OF the nj
ted STATES and be settled and formed into distinct
republican States sc. Virginia took the lead i'm
responding To this recommendation. As the terms
employed in her deed OF cession substantially
followed BY the other States In making their cgS-
sions it will answer my purpose to quote only from
thp VIRGINIA deed Of cessiCn, made in 1881. The
laDguare OF shat deed was, that the lands cedcd-
sbII a considered common Rad for the and Ienea
n ~ or the United Staesas have become shall
members of the Confederation FEDERAL alliance or said States
inclusive, and shall be faithfully and coma nde dis
sp of for that purpose and for other use purpose
whatever"
The necessary legal effect OF this deed, well as
others afterwards executed by the other States
WAS 10 vest the title of the lanes i'm the United States,
rs fine trustee for the use and benefit Of all the
States The objects of the trust distinctly emu
mcrated the lands were TO constitute cJrgmOaf ud,
and were 10 be faithfully disposed Of for that pur
pose: that Is, for raising common r"la and for no
uthcruse rpurpose whatever: and in due time after
settlements should be made thereon, they were TO be
formed into States and be admitted as such into /.
the Confederation The paramount consideration .
that gave interest To the original controversy was
the supposed money value of TIE lands. in counec
uuu with the heavy pccuniary embaITassments I'M .
der which the States were all laboring Hence the
leading idea in the deed of cessiOn looks to the /
money cG.ie OF the lands; they were 10 be common
tw.d; they to be faithfully disposed u for the
purpose OF q common tJ1d-and for no other use or /
purpose whatever but a common fund
IL was 10 authorize the new Government TO exc
cute the trusts raised in the cesson deeds that Con