If my friend from Georgia has made any intem- the model on which it was based. I have put the perate and hasty remark, he can explain his posi-old States exactly on the footing of the new; and tion, and doubtless he will do it in due time.

if my friend from Missouri can show me that there is a hair's breadth of difference between the position which I propose the old States shall occupy and the position which the new States do occupy, I will change my amendment, and make them pre cisely equal.

The Senator from Missouri says that I have presented a system by which I would tax the present generation for the benefit of posterity; and he says, let posterity meet their own burdens. I had thought that it was rather a pleasure to labor for our children to look at the interests of posterity, My object in offering the amendment was, not and that such was one of the great ends and busi- to give the old States an advantage, but to place ness of life. It is my rule in reference to my own them on the same footing. Ah, but the gentleman family. But what is the gentleman's rule? He is says, my amendment does not provide that if these for taxing posterity, as well as the present gener- lands are applied to building any part of a railroad, ation, without end. My rule and my system, the whole of it shall be used by the United States which he noticed, was to invest funds in compa- in transporting troops and munitions of war with nies like the Louisville and Portland Canal, and out toll; and the amendment does provide that the let them tax until they have been reimbursed their States may, in their discretion, use the land grantcapital and expenses; and when that is done, re- ed for education, for railroads, or other internal lieve posterity, relieve travel and commerce, by improvements The amendment does contain making the work free from toll. After the capital those provisions; and the reason why I said these has been reimbursed, and a reasonable interest has lands might be applied to internal improvements been realized, why not benefit posterity? What or to education, at the discretion of the States, and is the policy that the gentleman advocates? Why made no provision for the free use of the improveit is to get land for the new States; allow them to ments by this Government, was, that the grants construct roads or canals, on their own hook to heretofore made of 500,000 acres to each of the use a Western phrase, or to do so by entering into new States for internal improvements, did not repartnership with private companies; and then not quire these States to give to the United States the only to tax the present generation, but to tax pos- free use of those improvements, which might be terity forever. His policy is to take national prop- constructed with the land so granted. As the new. erty and hand it over to the new States, excluding States received each 500,000 acres, without restricthe old, so they may use it to secure revenues to tion or condition, as an internal-improvement fund, themselves by taxing travel and commerce; while I thought a like exemption would only be just to my policy is to retain the control of our own funds, the old States provided for in my amendment. keep the improvements made with our money or The new States had been provided for by former our lands under our own jurisdiction, and ulti-legislation, both in regard to education and internal mately make their use free to all the people of the improvements, more liberally than my amendment United States. But, if I cannot induce Congress provides for the old States. While providing a to do this, and I fear it is impossible, then I desire little for the old States, I wished them to have that that all the States shall participate equally in a just discretion which would place them on the same division of the public lands. Whether I am right footing with the new States, both with respect to or my brother, let the present and the future de- education and internal improvements. That is the whole object of the amendment.

termine.

These are the main points in the Senator's speech which I wished to notice. As to equivalents, I think that my amendment will partially restore an equality among the States. My friend commented upon some of the provisions of my amendment; and he says it allows the old States to select the lands anywhere, and prescribes no time within which they are to be sold. Now, can he show me where any time is fixed for selling the lands granted to the new State's? He objects to my amendment, because it allows the States to select lands anywhere. But does it not say, that if the States select lands which have been reserved at $2 50 per acre, they shall only receive half the quantity? What did you do in the act of 1841? I referred to that as the model of my amendment. When, in that act, you granted 500,000 acres of land to the States for purposes of internal improvement, you allowed them to select the lands anywhere; you did not limit them as to time of sale or anything else. I told you when I introduced my amendment, that the act of 1841 was

In my humble opinion, the more this subject is sifted, the more it is looked into, the more striking will be the conviction that we are entitled, as a cestui que trust, under the deed of cession from Virginia. I think we ought to put the public domain acquired since the formation of this Government on the same footing with the original domain. The more we think and reflect, the stronger will appear the right of the old States to participate with the new. I know that there cannot be ex. act, mathematical justice, but there may be some approximation to it. That is what I have attempted to accomplish. As to exact equality, I do not ask it. Perfect equality is not attainable. In the act distributing the proceeds of the public lands, the new States get ten per cent. in addition to the five per cent. There is an advantage in favor of the new States. This advantage of ten per cent. on sales thereafter to be made was allowed them for prospective population, and not for the number of townships or square miles, on which the gen. tleman from Michigan insists.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, FEBRUARY 25, AND MARCH 3, 1852.

WASHINGTON:

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE.

SPEECH.

this kind are unconstitutional; neither do I think that an open question. If anything can be settled by the action of the Government, that question is settled; because it has been the practice of the Government, for thirty years, to grant these lands to the several States for the construction of roads and canals; so that the whole argument of the gentleman, who last but one addressed the House on this subject, [Mr. ORR,] to show the constitutionality of it, it seems to me, was to prove a point decided. This is no objection to me. I believe it is constitutional to make these grants; and I believe that that question has been settled by the action of the Government, by every Congress, and by the decisions of the courts.

But, in justice, some provisions should be made for the old States, also, out of these public lands; and it is to that I wish to call the attention of the House upon this occasion. It is not known generally what the amounts of these grants are, and I have taken some pains to ascertain how much has already been granted to the new States and to the Territories. For that purpose I have an official statement from the Land Office, which shows that there has been granted to the land Statessome twelve in number-for all purposes, and to the Territories, 84,000,000 and over of the public lands. There has been granted to a part of the States, as follows: Ohio...

Indiana.

Illinois.

Missouri.

Arkansas.

Florida.

Iowa...:

Wisconsin.

2,273,858.77 acres
3,267,460.61

66

66

66

5,584,167.94

3,242,627.00"

Alabama.

2,094,284.00"

Mississippi

4,151,011.00

Louisiana..

.10,210,122.58

Michigan.

Tennessee.

California..

66

The practical effect, and the claim here set up is, that as far as the lands are granted to the States, they belong exclusively to the twelve land States, and you may go on granting as much as you choose; and yet the old States have no right to share in these grants. My opinion may be very different from that of other gentlemen here, but my opinion is, that it is not justice to the old States to grant so much land to the Western States, and deny the old States similar grants for the same purposes. I claim for the old States only justice, and I am willing to do justice and to be generous to the Western States. I do not want to be unjust or ungenerous to them. I do insist, however, that while large grants are made to them for railroad purposes, the old States have a right to ask grants for the same purpose, to some extent at least; and it is as right for the one as for the other. We have but one Constitution, and all the States are upon an equal footing by the Constitution and the laws, and these lands are the common property of all the States. I should like to know how one or a dozen of these States are constitutionally entitled to these grants, and yet it is unconstitutional to make them to the others? Upon what principle is it? If it is right to grant lands for one road, it is right to make grants for others.

There is an ingenious argument used here, which I shall notice. It is this: You have no right to ask these grants for the old States. Why? Because the Western States double the value of the alternate sections on each side of the road, and therefore you have no right to ask these lands for the old States, for they cannot do that. If gentlemen will look into these railroad bills, they will find that the roads proposed, for the purpose of getting their sections, have a range of thirty miles -fifteen on each side of the road-to locate their sections upon. Every one knows that railroads are not made where there are no settlements. They are constructed for business purposes between settlements, and villages, and cities. They are usually made through the most settled parts of the country, and, consequently, will pass through lands located and settled. For this reason it is that they must have thirty miles in width from which to make their selection, in order to get their lands, which they are to take in alternate sections. How is it with the other sections left for the Government? By the law, they are doubled for only And there have been sold of the public lands only six miles on each side of the road, making in all one hundred and one millions and some odd acres; twelve miles; therefore less than one half as so that there has been actually given away, by much land as is granted to the roads is doubled in grants to the new States and to the Territories, an price in point of fact. Only the land lying in a amount of the public domain equal to all that has strip two fifths as wide as is granted to the roads been sold for the public benefit, less only by about from which to make their selection, is doubled in 16,000,000 acres. This fact ought to be borne price to the Government. This two fifths lying in mind. So far as lands are sold, and the pro-along the road is the part most thickly settled, and ceeds thereof paid into the Treasury of the United States, they are disposed of for the benefit of all

.84,222,184.12"

New York was the first State that ceded her lands to the General Government in 1781; and in her cession thereof, she expressly asserted that it was to place them as "a common fund to defray the expenses of the war. Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, made similar cessions afterwards, and in every one of them it was expressed that the lands thus ceded were to be used for the "common benefit" of all the States.

What is the practical effect of these grants?

on which, therefore, will be found the least land in proportion for the road. I believe it may be safely said that these road bills will not double the price of one half as much land as is granted to the roads; and in addition to that, not one half of the land doubled in price will probably ever be sold at that double price.

[Here the morning hour expired.]

WEDNESDAY, March 3, 1852.

Mr. BENNETT (in continuation) said: Mr. SPEAKER: I have a proposition which I send to the Clerk's desk, and ask that it may be read.