Charles City Republican intelligencer. [volume] (Charles City, Iowa) 1861-1864, 1862-01-02
Homestead Bill.

REMARKS OF MR.. vANDEvER, OF IOWA.
In the House of Representatives on
the 18th ult., the bill to secure home
steads to actual settlers and provide
bounty for soldiers in lieu of grants
of land was under consideration, when
Mr.. Vandcvcr remarked as follows:
x Sir, | appeal to the expe-
rience Of gentlemen, if it is not an un-
controvertible fact, that lands lying
unoccupicd and uncultivatcd afford a
very small basis of credit, and that
in those States and communities where
large bodies of public lands lie in that
condition, they are the bane of the
community, and paralyze the encr-
gies of those States. If we desire to
enlarge the basis of credit, how can
we do it better than by promoting the
occupancy and cultivation Of those
lands +? So far as increasing the rev.
enue by sales of the public lands is
concerned, if we were to-day to throw
upon the market every solitary acre
of the public lands that is unappropri-
ated, what would that amount to :?
Nothing. The basis to which we are
to look is not the ST ,25 per acre that
can be brought into the public Treas.
ury by the sale of these lands, but it
is the permanent basis which the
occupation and cultivation of these
lands will afford for taxation to pay
the enormous burdens that are to be
imposed on the country.
Mr.. Porter. Will the gentleman
from Iowa permit me to ask him a
question?
Mr.. VASDEvER. Yes.
Mr.. Potter. The question | desire
to ask the gentleman is, whether if
all the lands included within the
boundaries of his State, and which
belonged to the Government, were
now unoccupied, the credit of the
Government would be any better than
it is at present?
Mr.. VANDEvER. That is the very
point l was trying to elucidate. The
settling Of that State, and of every
other State, has improved the credit
of the Government. 1t is fallacy to
suppose that the title to these lands is
to be acquired by purchase. What
we are to look to is the energy that
is displayed in subduing these lands
to cultivation, and developing the re-
sources of the country. The title is
to be acquired by occupancy and not
by purchase. In that particular the
proposed homestead policy and the
bounty land policy stand in opposition
to each other We must adhere to
the idea that the title to public lands
is to be acquired by occupancy. This
bill carries out the idea. Whenever
these lands are donated as bounty
lands to soldiers, the price of the land
warrants becomes the price of the
lands /; but secure the lands to actual
settlers and tide of emigration will
pour in upon them, and the settlement
and occupation of them will increase
UNNECESSARILY the basis Of credit of
the Government. No man even sup
poses that when these unoccupied
lands arc pledged to the creditors Of
the Government as security, that in
default of payment those creditors
may forcclose at any time. and cause
the lands to bc sold to pay the debts
Of the Government. All that could
be expected of the Government is to
favor the immediate settlement and
cultivation of the lands, enhancing
their value, and thereby increasing
the value of the security which exists
in the ability of the Government to
raise the revenue necessary to pay
our debts.