Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

are not read to the House. I understand such has Mr. JONES. It is not my purpose to make a been the practice of this body ever since the adop-speech, but it is evident, that while this bill is contion of the rule allowing of the filing of petitions tinued before the House that no other committee without presentation to the House. can be called for reports.

ATTENDANCE OF COUNSEL.

Mr. ORR, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill, of which previous notice had been given, entitled "A bill to facilitate the attendance of coun

sel residing at a distance from the Capitol, by, classifying the docket of the Supreme Court; which was read a first and second time by its title and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. Mr. LANE, by unanimous consent of the House, introduced a memorial from a portion of the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Oregon; which was ordered to lie upon the table and be printed.

Mr. LANE. I have two other memorialsMr. GOODENOW. I object to their introduction, and call for the orders of the day.

GRANT OF LANDS TO MISSOURI.

The SPEAKER. The order of the day is called for, which is House bill No. 104, and upon that the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. MILLER] has || the floor.

Mr. MILLER addressed the House for an hour in favor of the objects of the bill, which had already been discussed, he said, by the ablest minds of the country; called attention to the resources of the Western States, and the aid they afford to the commerce of the Eastern-to the increased settlement of lands in the vicinity of the great rivers; from which he inferred that by encouraging internal improvements, a similar effect would be pro

duced.

[See Appendix for Mr. M.'s Speech.]

Mr. HARRIS, of Tennessee. Is there a motion pending to refer this bill to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union?

The SPEAKER. There is.

Mr. HARRIS. Believing, as I do, that this House is as well prepared to act at this moment upon this subject as it will be at any future time, I'move the previous question.

Mr. RANTOUL. I ask the gentleman who has made that motion to withdraw it. So far all the speaking upon this bill has been made by gentlemen coming from one section of the Union.

Mr. HOUSTON. I hope the gentleman will not withdraw. I want this subject disposed of. Mr. JONES, of Tennessee. I ask my colleague to withdraw for one moment, in order to allow me to make a suggestion, by which this subject can be gotten over for the present, and allow the other committees to be called. It is not competent for any other committee to report so long as this subject continues before the House.

Mr. CARTTER. Let us send it to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union; that will get it out of the way.

Mr. MARSHALL, of Kentucky. I ask the gentleman from Tennessee not to withdraw his call for the previous question. We are as well prepared now to vote upon this bill as we ever shall be. If the friends of the bill can carry it through, I want to give them a chance.

Mr. HARRIS. I have not much feeling in relation to whether the previous question be now pressed or not. I called it in deference to what I

conceived to be the wishes of the House.

Mr. JONES. If the friends of the bill wish to press it to a vote now, I am ready. I will not object to the previous question.

Mr. HOUSTON. I move that the House do now proceed to the consideration of the business on the Speaker's table. The bill before the House will then lie over till to-morrow. Several MEMBERS. Oh, no! let's dispose of it

[blocks in formation]

Mr. HALL. I rise to a question of order. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. JONES] has addressed the House once upon this question. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. RANrules of the House-the gentleman from TenTOUL] now claims the floor, and, according to the nessee having spoken once-I think he is entitled to it.

I only desire to make the proposition, that the busMr. JONES. I do not propose to make a speech. shall be called for reports, and then, when the call iness be passed over until all the other committees reaches the Committee on Public Lands again, that this subject will come up as unfinished business. All I want is to allow the other committees to report. I have no report to make, but I think that is due to the other committees of the House.

Mr. HALL. I have no objection in the world to the postponement of this business, provided it is postponed in such a way that it shall come up again. And if the gentleman from Tennessee will modify his proposition so that this subject shall be postponed till some day certain, and made the special order for that day, so that it will come up precisely in the same condition which it now occupies, I have no objection. But I do not want it postponed to go on to the Speaker's table again, for if it does, we shall never reach it.

Mr. JONES. My proposition does not carry it to the Speaker's table. It only provides that it shall go over until the other committees shall be called for reports. Then, when the Committee on Public Lands is called, it will again come up, and will occupy precisely the same position which it now holds. I am in favor of having this matter go over, but I am opposed to making it a special order.

The SPEAKER. The proposition of the gentleman from Tennessee requires unanimous con

sent.

Mr. ORR and others objected.

Mr. RANTOUL said that, in his opinion, the old thirteen States have certainly a great interest in determining what shall be done with the public lands, in some respect equal with the new; and the question is, what use can be made with the public lands until some general measure shall be agreed upon beneficial and equally advantageous

to the old and the new States.

A general plan of railroads, he said, has been commenced, (not confined to any particular State or section,) forming a portion of a great and wellcontrived system. The commerce of the nation is destined to be an interchange between the valley of the Mississippi and foreign countries to a great extent. It is a matter of interest, then, that additional channels of intercourse shall be constructed, open and convenient. So far as this bill proposes to aid Missouri, it does so without the loss of a dollar to the General Government. If the Atlantic States would have a great commercial and navigating interest, they should look to the agricultural productions of the West, which keep that interest alive. He would say to the people of the Northeast that cotton, woolen, and iron must some day or other be manufactured hundreds of miles west of where they now are. The precise year cannot be given; but the West will cease to buy those things of the Northeast, and make them just when it shall think that it will be to its advantage. Therefore, the Northeast should encourage the West in agriculture, opening roads to the Northeast and Southeast, connecting the Atlantic slope with the valley of the Mississippi in the cheapest and most practicable way. So sure as a course shall be taken to depress western agriculture, so sure will manufacturing depart from the Northeast to the West.

[See Appendix for Mr. R.'s speech.]

Mr. MOORE, of Louisiana, next obtained the floor, and said: I have but a few words to say on this subject

Mr. HOUSTON, (interrupting.) I would suggest to the gentleman from Louisiana, that as he will have the floor in the morning, and as this will be the first business that comes up, it would be better, with his consent, to go into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union now. [Cries of "No, no!" and Let him go on!"] Mr. MOORE. I should be happy to oblige the

[ocr errors]

gentleman from Alabama, but I will remind him that to-morrow is Friday, and private bill day. I should much prefer speaking to-morrow morning, if I was sure of getting the floor; but as it is private bill day, I know I shall have no opportunity of being heard, and I shall therefore retain the floor now.

Mr. HOUSTON. The gentleman would be entitled to the floor in the morning in preference to anybody else, or to any other business. My object is to get into the committee, and finish up a special order there which is hanging in the way of all other business. We have time to dispose of it to-day, and I should be glad if the House would so indulge me.

Mr. MOORE. If I was sure I could get the floor to-morrow, I would yield to the gentleman's suggestion.

[Cries of "Go on now!"]

Mr. ORR. If I understand the rules of the House correctly, the gentleman from Alabama has a right to take the floor from the gentleman from Louisiana, the morning hour having expired.

Mr. CLEVELAND. Not after the floor has been assigned to the gentleman from Louisiana. Mr. HOUSTON. I have certainly a right to take the floor from the gentleman, as the morning hour has expired.

The SPEAKER. derstand the rules.

The Chair does not so un

Mr. CLEVELAND. Such is not the rule. Mr. HOUSTON. Any member has a right, at the expiration of the morning hour, to move to proceed to the consideration of the business on the Speaker's table. If the gentleman from Louisiana had been in the midst of his speech, I could have. committed that motion.

The SPEAKER. The Chair did not understand the gentleman from Alabama to submit such a motion.

Mr. HOUSTON. I submit that motion nown. The question was put, and the motion was not agreed to.

Mr. MOORE. I shall not detain the House, Mr. Speaker, for the full hour allowed me by the rules, in the discussion of this question. But as I had the honor to introduce a bill kindred to the one now under consideration, I feel it incumbent upon me to say a few words.

The whole subject of the policy of making these grants may as well be discussed now, and on this bill as on the other bills which will probably come before us. I had the honor of introducing a bill to grant to the State of Louisiana the right of way through and a portion of the public lands, which is now before the Committee on Public Lands, and will, I hope, be reported in a few days. But as I may not then have an opportunity of giving my views upon this subject, I embrace this opportunity to do it.

I was sorry, the other day, to hear a gentleman upon this floor endeavor to connect this subject with the question of internal improvements by the General Government. Now, I maintain that this cannot fairly be done. This is simply a donation for public purposes. By looking over your statute-book, from the very commencement of this Government, you will find that the very first law that was ever passed regulating the public lands, made large donations of public lands for public purposes. The very first bill upon the subject of lands, passed before even the adoption of the present Constitution, made large donations of the public lands for the purposes of public education. I will state to the House a few of the grants of this description that have been made. We find by reference to the statute-book, that large grants of the public lands have been made to cities, to towns, to counties for county-seats, and to States for seats of government. A grant of land was made to build the city of Detroit-not only a portion of the old town, but 10,000 acres besides. The city of Natchez also has had a grant. Four sections of land were granted to the State of Indiana for the purpose of fixing a seat of government. Thirtysix sections and 1,620 acres besides, were granted to the State of Alabama for the same purpose. I find that grants have been made even to the old States. For instance, a grant of land was made to Connecticut for a deaf and dumb asylum-and very properly, I think. Illinois also had a grant of land's for a seat of government.

I find that the first grant of lands for purposes of internal improvement was made in 1823, when

a grant was made to the State of Ohio, to construct a road from the Lower Rapids of the Miami to Lake Erie, one mile on each side of the road-for in those days it was all wild country, and the United States thought proper to make a grant of|| the whole land and not of the alternate sections as we now do. Another grant of a like nature was made to the State of Ohio in 1827, for a road from Columbus to Sandusky. In 1827, these grants for railroads and canals were commenced. The first grant was to the State of Illinois, for the construction of a canal, alternate sections of five miles on each side; and in the same year a similar grant was made to the State of Indiana, for a canal from the Wabash to Lake Erie. In 1828, another grant was made to the State of Ohio, and in 1830, further time was granted to the State to locate those lands, and they were authorized to apply the grant either to the canal or to a railroad. I will remark here, to my Democratic friends, that this bill was approved by General Jackson, who was the first to put an end to improper appropriations for the purposes of internal improvement. A grant was made to Florida for a canal, and 400,000 acres of land were granted to Alabama for improving the rapids in the Tennessee river, known as the Muscle Shoals. James K. Polk, who was as much opposed to internal improvements as any man in this nation, advocated and voted for those two bills.

Now, sir, I contend that the bill now before us cannot connect itself with the subject of internal improvements by the General Government. It is simply a donation of public lands for public usesa donation which I hope and trust will be returned to the Government, not only once, but twofold, or threefold.

Now, let us lay all abstractions aside and take a plain, common-sense view of this subject. The fourth section of the bill provides

"That the said lands hereby granted to the said State shall be subject to the disposal of the Legislature thereof, for the purposes aforesaid, and no other; and the said railroads shall be and remain a public highway, for the use of the Government of the United States, free from toll or other charge upon the transportation of any property or troops of the United States."

Most certainly the General Government has a right to contract for the transportation of troops and their supplies. Here we say to the State of Missouri, make this road through your country, transport our troops and supplies, and we will give you every alternate section of land, but with the proviso that the remaining sections shall bring double the usual price.

duty, impost, or toll therefor, imposed by the 'said State." So that if the people of Louisiana should wish to-morrow to make an expenditure of money for the purpose of making any of these rivers navigable, they could not impose any tax, or impost, or toll upon any citizen of the United States for traveling through that channel. Now, it will be perceived that the old States have a kind of guardianship over us. They keep the new States in a sort of pupilage, although they are full grown. Very well, we do not complain of it, but we wish the old States, as good fathers of families, to act liberally, generous, and kind towards us.

I now beg leave to call the attention of the House to one of the projects for a railroad, which I had the honor of presenting to the House, and for which we ask that a grant of the public lands should be made. The road is to run from the bank of the Mississippi river, opposite New Orleans, to Opelousas, and from thence to Texas. The whole distance is from two hundred and fifty to two hundred and sixty miles. The first fifty miles will run from New Orleans to Lafourche, through a swamp country, where the United States are not in the possession of one foot of land, as a letter from the register of the land office, which I hold in my hand, will show. Upon the route from Lafourche to Berwick's bay, there are about 3,200 acres of land belonging to the Government, as will appear from a letter from the Surveyor General of Louisiana, which I now have before me. The rest is either land granted before the change of Government, or ceded to the State, as swamp land. This route goes through swamp lands which are susceptible of being reclaimed, and we trust it will soon be done. The whole route from New Orleans to Berwick's bay has been surveyed, but no company has been organized, because under our constitution, no special acts of incorporation can be passed. It requires that all laws shall be general; and it was found, when we endeavored to get up this company, that the general act of incorporation then in force, would not answer for a corporation for railroads, and therefore we were obliged to defer it to the present session of the Legislature of the State.

From Berwick's bay to Opelousas, a distance of about ninety miles, the road will run principally through a prairie and over lands which were granted before a change of Government; and the United States will not be required to give any lands at all, except it may be a spot here and there in the prairie. The six miles may extend so as to cover some small tracts of land from Opelousas Again, by the 6th section of the bill, we require to Bayou Chicot, a distance of twenty-seven miles. the State of Missouri to carry the mails along A large portion of the lands on the route were also these roads at such price as Congress may stipu-ferior portions only remaining from Bayou Chicot granted before the change of Government, the in

late.

Now, we may suppose that Congress will not ask that the mail shall be carried at a lower rate than is paid for other and similar routes in the United States. But you must provide for carrying it over that route as rapidly as it can be carried by private express, otherwise the mail matter will decrease and letters will be carried by private conveyance. Now, we promise to transport whatever you have to transport free of charge; and I ask gentlemen if it is not a fair and liberal proposition, and whether we have not the right to ask that aid shall be given us to construct these roads for the considerations mentioned?

Now, Mr. Speaker, the Constitution of the United States gives to Congress full power to dispose of these public lands, and to make all needful rules and regulations in relation thereto, and therefore, in accordance with this provision of the Constitution, the power of Congress to make these grants cannot be questioned.

But this question may be considered in another point of view. The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. PHELPS] on yesterday alluded to the fact, that the State of Missouri is prohibited from taxing the lands sold by the United States for the space of five years; and she is also prohibited from taxing the lands given to soldiers for the space of three years. Now, a like clause has been introduced into the constitution, or rather into the act admitting the State of Louisiana into the Union. But that act goes further. It provides that "the river Mississippi, and the navigable rivers leading into the same, or into the Gulf of Mexico, 'shall be common highways and forever free, as 'well to the inhabitants of said State as to other 'citizens of the United States, without any tax,

to the Sabine river, a distance of about fifty-seven miles. It will run through a pine forest now of little or no value to the United States. Indeed, I will venture to say, that if the whole of this portion of these lands were to be put up at public auction tomorrow, they would not bring ten cents per acre. But once run a railroad through them, and you make them valuable for the lumber to the prairie country, in the vicinity and below, and also valuable to the prairie country in Texas. For I hope and trust that if we ever get this road through to the Sabine river, that it will be continued on through Texas. The subject is now before the Texas Legislature, and I feel certain that if we can once get this road completed to the border of Texas, it will be continued on through that State to El Paso.

According to a hasty calculation which I have made, the grant which we ask for for the whole line of the main road will not exceed 230,000 acres of land belonging to the United States, and nearly all of that is land which is now entirely worthless to the Government. As I have remarked, it is not worth ten cents per acre. But run your railroad through it, and you will make every alternate section worth $2 50 per acre for the timber; the two branches contemplated will take but a small additional quantity.

A MEMBER. What is the length of your road? Mr. MOORE. About two hundred and fifty or two hundred and sixty miles. I say the grant will be small when compared with the length of the road. The public lands do not lie along the route of the road for more than fifty or at most sixty miles.

Now, to show you that it is probable that this

road will be made, in a series of addresses which I made to the people along the route upon this subject, I calculated the produce of seven of the parishes between Lafourche and St. Laundry for the year 1849. I will here remark, that when I went there a great portion of that country was a wild prairie, on which cattle were pastured, and a little corn made. But in the year 1849, those seven little parishes produced 72,000 hogsheads of sugar, which produced about 36,000 hogsheads of molasses. They raised about 20,000 bales of cotton, and sent to market about 40,000 head of cattle, all of which was then worth about $5,400,000. I showed that by making this road they-the inhabitants and productive classes of those parisheswould save in freight, insurance, and passage in one year, at least $300,000. Now, if the people of those parishes have intelligence enough to raise that amount of produce so valuable, they will certainly have intelligence enough to take this matter up, and make this road. I take it for granted that this road will be made, at least as far as Opelousas; and if this Congress will make us the grant of land which we desire, I feel no hesitation in saying, that it will go as far as the Sabine, or Texas line. And if it ever gets that far, just as sure as I stand here, it will be extended through the State of Texas. In relation to this route through Texas, I will quote from Captain R. B. Marcy's report of a survey of the route from El Paso to Red river, in which he says, page 224, "Our road passes over uniformly level 'ground, crossing no mountains or deep valleys, and for five hundred miles on the eastern extremity runs through the heart of a country possessing great natural advantages." "I conceive it to be the best overland wagon route to California." Speaking of the practicability of a railroad along that line, he says, (page 226:) "There are as few difficulties to encounter as any other route that can be found in our country." Page 224: "We found a smooth road over 'gently undulating country of prairie and timber, and abounding with numerous clear spring 'branches for two hundred miles, and in many places covered with groves of musquito timber." "The soil cannot be surpassed for fertility." Page 226: "It would appear to have been designed by the Great Architect of the universe for a railroad.

[ocr errors]

From El Paso to Red river is about seven hundred miles."-See Ex. Doc. Sen., 31st Cong., 1st sess., No. 64.

I have not the least doubt that if this grant is made by Congress, that the road will be continued on to El Paso.

The other day a discussion arose in reference to our Army upon the southwestern frontier. Now if the immense expenditures of money for supplying this road is made we will transport your supplies to the Sabine river free of charge. We will carry your mails through at the lowest possible prices; and instead of being weeks in carrying it to the Sabine river, as is now the case, we will carry it through in twelve hours. Then is it not something worth looking at, when we see these supplies, which have cost the United States so much money, carried free of cost? General Jesup states that the opening of the Red river alone would save $45,000 a year in supplying the fifth regiment of infantry, now stationed on the northern frontier of Texas. Now, if we will put down all your supplies and troops upon the borders of Texas free of charge, I ask what the United States would then save? Can there be a doubt but it would save double $45,000 in a year? I venture to assert that these lands, from Bayou Chicot to the Sabine, could not be sold now for $50,000 if put up at auction, unless there was a prospect of a railroad through them, in which case I admit they would become valuable.

There is another subject to which I desire briefly to allude. It is well known that Congress have passed laws in relation to the inspection of steamboat boilers; and for what reason? Principally to save life. It is also a well-known fact, that the danger in traveling upon a railroad is much less than by any other mode of traveling. It is less even than traveling by private carriage. If I were to state the returns of the railroads in New England, and in England, you would hardly believe me when I say that in upwards of 20,000,000 persons who traveled by railroad, less than 200 were killed, and most of them on account of in proper conduct of their own. In New England, out of 19,000,000

passengers and employés, only 190 odd were killed and wounded, and less than one half of them were passengers.

Now, does not this enter into the consideration of the legislation of the country? If we have a right to appoint inspectors to inspect steamboat boilers, have we not the same right to contribute to the means of lessening the dangers of traveling, and making it a hundred fold less? I trust that this House will make these grants of land. Yesterday the subject of homesteads was brought up. If that is thought to be the best thing for us to do, I hope this House will adopt it. I think that any mode which will keep these lands out of the hands of speculators, is a judicious and proper one for this Congress to adopt. I think that the greatest curse that can befall a country is to have large bodies of land come into the hands of speculators. For many years past I have been in a situation to speculate in lands, if I had chosen to have done 80. But I have such a horror, such a detestation for that traffic, on account of its injurious influence in the prosperity of a country, that I have never bought a single acre of land for speculation, alone. It is because, in my younger days, when I was poor, and strove hard for a living, I saw the impropriety of such a course. This subject of granting the right of way and making grants of land for railroads has been so thoroughly discussed here, and so much more ably than I can expect to discuss it, that I will say nothing more upon the subject, but I will merely give to this House some little experience of my own. Fifty-one years ago I descended the Mississippi. I was then young, but the scenery of that river, as it then appeared, is most vividly imprinted upon my mind. At that time there was not a white inhabitant upon the bank of that river, from above the mouth of the Ohio to a place then designated as Walnut Hills, but how known as Vicksburg, save a few at New Madrid and environs. At that period the now great, fertile, and flourishing Valley of the Mississippi contained but a few thousand souls. Then a few flat and keel-boats transported the whole produce of that valley to a market. In 1812 the first steamboat that ever plied the waters of that river, landed at the Levee of New Orleans. I was fortunate enough to be there and see it land, and to be one of the first passengers upon that boat on its first departure from the wharf of New Orleans.

Now look at the change that has taken place upon those waters. In the place of one solitary steamboat, you have thousands of floating palaces stemming the current of that mighty stream as if it were by magic. Now there are ten millions of souls in that great valley. Now, instead of a commerce which required only a few flat-boats to accommodate it, you have a commerce which amounts, according to the estimate of 1851, ot $220,000,000. The exports of domestic products from New Orleans, then merely nominal, now amount to upwards of $67,000,000 per annum. And all this mighty change has been brought about by American industry and American enterprise, and I am enabled to stand here, through the partiality of my constituents, and say that I am proud of having been one of the pioneers of that far southwest-proud of being a citizen of this glorious Union. Who would not be proud? Ah, I hear a still voice saying that there are a few who, with sacrilegious hand, would tare down this fair fabric. May God in his mercy forgive them--they know not what they do. Well, if in my short life I have seen all these changes, and brought about mostly by the effect of steam applied to boats by the invention of the great Fulton, what may we not expect to see in the next fifty years by these railroads, when brothers and sons living in the far West upon the Pacific ocean, will be brought together as neighbors! I have within these fifty years seen all of Louisiana purchased, and now that purchase contains four States. Since that time Texas has been annexed and New Mexico and California have been acquired. When these railroads shall be completed, which are now proposed, we shall have an intercommunication from the eastern shores of our country upon the Atlantic to the Pacific on the west. Shall we not make some small grants of our public domain towards the accomplishment of so great an object? I hope if we live a few years longer we shall see these railroads reaching to the far western limits of Texas, and the day may come possibly, when those who are now here in this House, when in

three times forty-eight hours, persons can go from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Then consider the effects upon this great nation and upon this great western country.

I take it that no man can doubt that the very instant you put these railroads through the public lands, you make every inch of that public land three fold more valuable than it now is. I know in my own State, along the roads that I propose, it|| will have the effect to make the public lands along them ten times more valuable.

In the bill which I had the honor to present, there is another railroad, which it is proper for me to mention. It is a road from Vicksburg, across the country, to Shreeveport, and thence to Texas. I will only say to the House, that this route is considered of sufficient importance for a survey to have been ordered by Congress, or the Senate, and that a survey and estimate has been made by W. H. Sidell, civil engineer. He has made an able report upon it, and says there are no difficulties to encounter that cannot easily be surmounted. The estimate of the whole cost of the road is at the rate of $15,000 per mile. I will say, that although the whole length of that road is one hundred and eighty miles, yet this grant of land to aid in its construction will be small in proportion to its length. And why? Because a large portion of it will go through lands already ceded to the State of Louisiana, and granted before the change of the Government, and therefore the grant by Congress will not be so great as its length would suppose. The public lands along this route, are principally poor land; very little or none have been sold for more than the minimum price, a dollar and a quarter an acre, except upon the borders of the Red river, where they have been disposed of long ago. I estimate that the grant by the bill will not exceed 400,000 acres. So that the whole grant which I apply for to this Congress, will not amount to more than, as near as I can now estimate it, from 630,000 to 650,000 acres of land. And for that we propose to carry your troops gratuitously, and to carry your mails, and to give every facility to the Government, which will make these lands ten times more valuable than they now are. I feel that I can contribute nothing further to aid this question, and that so much has already been said, that little or nothing has been left for me to

say.

Mr. FICKLIN. This subject has already been so ably discussed by gentlemen who have preceded me, that it is with much of diffidence and distrust of my ability to interest the members of this House, that I now attempt to add anything to what has been said. When I hear members from the older States complaining that the grants of land which have been and are likely to be made by this Government, are extravagant; when I hear them say that the Congress of the United States is squandering the public domain; and when I hear the representatives of the people from the twelve land States and from the Territories characterized and denounced as land pirates and robbers, it causes me to reflect, and ask if it is possible that that judgment to which we have all, in the new States, so unanimously come, can possibly be wrongto ask myself if it is necessary that that decision should be reviewed. And I confess that the more I reflect upon the subject, the more I examine this land question, the more thoroughly, and the more decidedly am I convinced that the course and policy of this Government should be more liberal in the future than it has been in the past; that instead of acting in a parsimonious manner, instead of holding in the miser's gripe the 1,400,000,000 of acres of land which belong to this Government, it should be dealt out liberally wherever a donation of this land can be made to subserve the public interest. Will gentlemen of this House adopt the selfish policy, that, because these lands cannot be granted alike to the new and old States, they will vote against grants to the new States because, forsooth, they may locally benefit the new States more than they do the old? Assuredly not.

If I understand the reports which have been made by the present and former Commissioners of the Land Office, the amount of public land in the twelve land States, whose names it is not necessary for me to repeat, because they are familiar to every member upon this floor, was 386,000,000 of acres, within a fraction. Of that 386,000,000, including all that has been set apart for common schools, all that has been granted for seminary

purposes, all that has been granted for purposes of internal improvement, less than one sixteenth part of the whole public domain in the twelve land States has been donated for these purposes to those States. Is that liberal? Is it extravagant? It does not strike me in that light. What should be the policy of this Government? In what does the wealth of a nation consist? Does it consist in holding hundreds of millions of acres of land for the deer and wolf to roam over? Is it not rather, sir, in planting upon every section of that land a tenant-a man who is able to till and cultivate it, and to bring it into that use for which nature's God had designed it? Of what avail are the millions of acres lying west of the Alleghany mountains to any person-when does their value commence? When do they begin to be useful to the country and its people? Not until there is placed upon it, to subdue its wild nature, to bring it to cultivation, and to subject it to the arts of industry, a husbandman who will make it of benefit to the Government. I acknowledge my indebtedness to the member from Massachusetts, [Mr. RANTOUL,] who has taken so large, enlightened, and liberal a view of the land question. I think it was probably as far back as 1838 that Mr. Calhoun, now no more, presented his projet with regard to the final disposition of the public domain. It was then that he foresaw that the present land system would not continue for a great number of years. He then foresaw that the proprietorship of the General Government of the public lands of the United States would soon cease-that in a few years, or a few score years, it would depart from it. With that view of the system, he presented a plan by which the lands were to be granted to the States in which they were situated, to be disposed of by those States, a portion of the proceeds to be paid into the Treasury of the General Government. It has been intimated also to-day, by the honorable member from Massachusetts, [Mr. RANTOUL,] that in a series of years this must be the result. It is certainly so. That is to be the ultimate destination of these lands. We all know that the weight of population is rapidly passing to the West. We are all aware of the rapid growth of that section of the Union, and those of us who live there feel that the new States are not placed upon a footing with the old States in regard to population. And why, it is asked, are we not placed upon a footing with the old States? The old thirteen States, together with those added since, except the twelve land States, are the proprietors of the soil within their limits. They possess the right of eminent domain. The power of the Legislatures of the thirteen old States, to which may be added Tennessee, Kentucky, Vermont, and probably others, to tax the lands within their limits is absolute and unquestioned. Is that the case with the new States of the West? Of the contrary we are all aware. We all know that but a very small portion of the lands situated in the new States are subject to taxation. We might go back further, and inquire why this distinction has been made. We might inquire how the title to these lands was originally acquired. Those granted by Virginia and Georgia were lands originally belonging to the British Crown, and acquired as the consequence of the Revolution; and they were claimed by the States within whose limits they fell. In consequence of difficulties springing up in regard to the title, these lands were ceded to the Federal Government. Nothing was paid originally in dollars and cents by the General Government to any one of these States for these lands.

The new States coming into the Union upon an equal footing with the old States, each one of them would have obtained the right of eminent domain to the lands situated within their limits. They would have had that right but for the provision which was contained in the ordinance of 1787, restricting and limiting the new States in that respect. That was an act of might, I contend, against right; because I hold whenever a State comes into this Union, it should be with all the rights, privileges, and immunities of the old States. With the Western States, however, it is not so. They came in under certain restrictions. That limitation was extended to the acts of admission by which Ohio, and other Northwestern and Southwestern States have come into the Union. This provision having been ingrafted upon the ordinance of 1787-these conditions were imposed upon the new States when they were admitted into the Union, when they were

not able to assert and maintain their own rights; it should not be thought hard and strange that when they have the power to maintain them that they should exercise it. I tell the gentlemen who prophecy that the new States will own the lands within their limits, that he most probably will live to see the fulfillment of his prophecy. I have not made the calculation, nor is it necessary that I should do so, as to the precise amount which a tax of a half cent per acre would have yielded since they have been owned by the Government, yet, suffice it to say, that there would have been furnished a sum of money greater than that is asked for any railroad improvement. It would cover everything in connection with the alternate sections-placing them at $1 25 per acre. We are told, in granting these lands, that they are all to be estimated at $125 per acre-that in grauting 1,000,000 of acres you grant $1,250,000. That has been the estimate of gentlemen upon this floor. Is that correct? The way to ascertain if it is correct is, to turn to their own States, and see if it applies there. The honorable member from Tennessee, [Mr. WATKINS,] who addressed the House upon yesterday, gave us data which I was very glad to hear from him. He gave us information in regard to the grants made to his State. I will say to him, that many of his views developed in the portion of the speech to which I have reference-for the provision of a homestead for the actual settler, met with my hearty approval. Members, by looking to their own States, will see that the estimation of all lands at $125 per acre, is a fallacious calculation. Take, for instance, the State of Tennessee. North Carolina, in 1789, made a most munificent grant to the State of Tennessee-of lands within her limits, subject, however, to the satisfaction of North Carolina military land warrants.

It turns out, as I understand it, that not one cent was ever realized by the General Government out of that grant; and what was not taken to satisfy North Carolina military land warrants, was of fered for sale at twelve and a half cents per acre from year to year, and would not bring that sum even at the present time. Afterwards, in 1846, land was granted free of charge to the State of Tennessee, and I understand that even now any person may obtain a title to a tract of these lands transferred to him, by paying the clerk of the county in which they lie his fees, (seventy-five cents,) for his services in preparing the papers. A portion of these lands are bestowed upon settlers free of all charge, except the fee of seventy-five cents to the officer, and yet, when we come to talk about the new States of Missouri, Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, and others of the new States and Territories, every acre of land granted by the General Government is set down at $1 25 an acre. I repeat, there is not a State in this Union, and never has been at any time, when the wild lands would be worth, taken together, $1 25 per acre. How is it with Illinois? I believe it is not denied, that Illinois has the largest proportion of agricultural lands of any State in the Union. She does not compete with her sister State Missouri, in the variety and abundance of ores, but in respect of her farming land, her fertile and productive soil, not one of the States of this Union can compare with the State of Illinois. Is the land in that State worth a dollar and a quarter? Not so. I doubt whether, upon an average, it is worth fifty cents an acre. We have prairies there that would astonish a man who had been raised in a timbered country, and used to clearing his farm by cutting down large trees, rolling logs in the spring, and getting off dead timber from his fields. We have very large prairies there, extending one hundred and fifty to two hundred miles in length, interspersed, to be sure, with timber. You may travel from Chicago, upon the lake, south, for one hundred and fifty miles through a prairie country, and it is one vast body of land, and for richness and fertility of soil, is not to be surpassed upon this continent. The prairies in this section are some of them fifteen, twenty, and thirty miles in width. How long, in the course of ordinary settlement, will it be before these lands are sold at $1 25 per acre, without extraneous aid. I venture to say, that they would not be settled within one hundred years.

The last Congress granted to Illinois, Mississippi, and Alabama, alternate sections of land for the construction of the Mobile and Chicago Railroad. That road passes through this prairie coun

try, and will run from fifty to sixty miles, and in some places much greater distances, without having any considerable elevation or depression to overcome, and across the most beautiful country for a railroad that can be found in the Union. The passing of that railroad from north to south, will bring into market those lands which would not be sold for a century to come, and gives to this Government $2 50 per acre for land which could not be sold for fifty cents per acre without the road. That is the effect which that railroad will bring about. That railroad will be made, and it will enable the people of the North, and of the Northwest, to exchange the products of that country for the products of the Southwest. It will enable the people of Illinois, in other words, to exchange corn, beef, and pork, with the people of the Southern States for their cotton, rice, and sugar.

Now, I will say a word in regard to my friends from Ohio. I find from indications heretofore made upon this floor, that some of our friends in that State intend to vote against these Missouri and lowa roads. I am astonished to find that any representative from the State of Ohio would for a moment entertain the proposition of voting against these projects. These bills, as far as I have examined them, and as far as I can judge of the geography of the country, are well conceived, and the roads are judiciously located. They are roads pointing to the Atlantic and Pacific, and which, therefore, connect themselves in an eminent degree with the interests of Ohio.

Mr. MEACHAM (here interrupting) made an inquiry, which was inaudible to the reporter.

find that he is right. I hope he will obtain the floor before the discussion is through, and give us the benefit of his eloquence.

Mr. CARTTER, (interrupting.) If the gentleman from Illinois is anxious to find a member from Ohio who will oppose this system of appro priation, perhaps I can accommodate him.

Mr. FICKLIN. Oh no. I know a couple already, and that is sufficient for me. I have no wish to wake up any more of them.

The State of Ohio is a star of the first inagnitude-one of the first States in this Union. Her internal improvements are progressing with a steadiness and rapidity which do her credit. I do not place her vote for this bill upon the ground that she has received large grants of land from the Government, but upon the ground that the provisions of the bill are right, and that Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maryland, New York, Massachusetts, and most of the New England States, are directly interested in it, and cannot oppose the bill without voting against their own interests. That is the ground upon which I expect their votes. Now, when I see Massachusetts extending her roads west, in order to invite the trade from the great valley of the Mississippi; when I see New York extending her railroads to Buffalo and Dunkirk, and enlarging her canals for the purpose of getting a share of that trade; when I see the struggles that were made by Pennsylvania in 1846-7 to extend her road from Philadelphia to Pittsburg; and when I see the efforts that are being made by Maryland and Virginia to reach the Ohio river at Wheeling and Parkersburg, it seems to me that there is a blending of interests between these Atlantic States and the Mississippi valley which must ultimately give us their votes for these railroad bills.

Mr. FICKLIN, (resuming.) I was remarking, that I was astonished that any one from the State of Ohio should think of voting against either the Now, how is it in regard to the State of IndiMissouri or Iowa railroad bill. The eastern con- ana? Any gentleman who will take up the hisnection of these roads must pass, of necessity,|tory of that State for the last few years, will find through the State of Ohio.

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. If the gentleman from Illinois will give way, I will move that the House adjourn.

[Cries of No! No! No!"]

Mr. FICKLIN. There seems to be a general disposition that I should go on with my remarks, and it accords with my own feelings to do so. 1 was about to remark, in regard to the State of Ohio, that she has had for internal improvements some lands, but not to a very great extent, considering the wealth and character of the State. She has, however, had a considerable amount. The feelings of the people of Ohio, it seems to me, must be coincident with the feelings of the people of Illinois. I would as soon have expected to have found my friends around me from Indiana opposing this road, as my friends from Ohio. Mr. STANTON, of Ohio. I wish the gentleman would particularize.

Mr. FICKLIN. Two gentlemen [Mr. SWEETSER and Mr. CARTTER] have already indicated their opposition by speeches upon this floor.

Mr. STANTON.' I am in favor of the bill. Mr. FICKLIN. I am glad to learn this fact. Mr. TAYLOR. I do not like to be considered among those who are said to be opposed to these grants for internal improvements in the Western States, and I will avail myself of the courtesy of the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. FICKLIN,] to make one statement, which I think is due to Ohio, which I have the honor in part to represent. It is frequently mentioned in debate, that Ohio has had a larger proportion of the public lands granted to her for internal improvements than any other Western State. This is not so. I understand that Illinois has had a grant of about 2,000,000 for internal improvements; and I had much pleasure in voting for it. Indiana has had more than Ohjo. I am perfectly willing to state to the gentleman that I am ready to vote for these appropriations to aid Missouri in her internal improvements. I only wish the policy of the majority of this House would so modify the present bill as to allow a grant to the railroad from the western portion of the country, through Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, to connect with the great internal improvements of the State of Maryland, by which we might have a great national work, from the western limits of the United States to the east, worthy of the nation. Such a work shall have my hearty approval.

Mr. FICKLIN. I thank my friend for his expression of interest in this matter, and am glad to

what gigantic efforts she has made in laudable and praiseworthy improvements. They will find that five or six railroads, which are now in active operation, concentrate, in her capital.

My friend from Ohio [Mr. TAYLOR] seems to think that the railroad connection between this and the Wabash valley will not be complete. He cannot be aware of the fact, that the railroad from Madison by Indianapolis to Terre Haute, in the State of Indiana, is now completed, and that the portion first completed, from Madison to Indianapolis, has been doing a very heavy business and yielding very fair profits. Before the frosts of another winter shall have visited us, the railroad connection between Boston, New York, Philadel phia, and Baltimore on the east, and Terre Haute on the Wabash, will be completed, if not by direct lines, sufficiently so for all commercial purposes. The honorable members from Ohio on this floor could not, if they would, resist those enterprises which are being carried on by the energy of their own State, and of the neighboring and adjacent States.

Mr. Speaker, this is no sectional question. The bills reported to this House asking grants of land for the States of Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi, have been well considered, and the roads therein mentioned connect themselves with vast and great interests in this country. You start by railroad from the city of Charleston, in South Carolina, passing through Augusta and Atlanta, in Georgia, to Chattanooga, in the State of Tennessee, the main trunk continuing on to Nashville, Tennessee, and a branch extending to Memphis, on the Mississippi river. There is to be, and must be, a conneetion between Charleston, in South Carolina, and Louisville, in Kentucky; between Charleston and Memphis, and between the remotest points in New England and the great Valley of the Mississippi, by Boston, Albany, Buffalo, Chicago, and Cleaveland. There is, then, a unity of interests in regard to these works that must command the support of our friends in the East, and of our friends in the South.

Sir, it was well said by the gentleman from Massachusetts--much better said than I can say it-that the opening up of these great thorough fares enables the people of the West--an agricul tural people, to have their produce transported to the Atlantic seaboard, either for consumption there or for further transportation to European markets. It enables the people of the South to pursue their sugar and cotton planting, regardless of raising

provisions; because they can be furnished with all the provisions they need at cheaper rates, from the grain-growing States of the West.

Corn usually sells upon the Atlantic seaboard, I believe, at from sixty cents to one dollar per bushel. It frequently sells in my district, in the State of Illinois, at ten cents per bushel. Hundreds of thousands of bushels of corn are raised there, and used in stall-feeding cattle in winter, which, in the spring, are driven to the Boston, New York, and Philadelphia markets. What you want, then, gentlemen, is cheap transportation. As you cheapen transportation, you give to the consumer the food necessary to sustain him at a lower rate than he can otherwise get it. It is cheaper to send produce a thousand miles by railroad than to send it a hundred miles on wheels by horse-power.

Let it be understood that I do not advocate this bill upon the ground that the State of Missouri has not received quite as much as another State. But I place it upon the broad ground that these roads are for the benefit of all; that the granting of alternate sections of the public lands does not cost anything to the General Government, because the reserved sections-the price of which is increased to $250 per acre-will yield as much money, and in less time, than the whole would if the improvements were not made.

Gentlemen from New York are more familiar with this subject than I am, but statistics which I have seen convince me that much of that portion of New York lying between Buffalo and Dunkirk, on Lake Erie, and Albany, would have been still a wild country but for the canals and railroads that have been run through it. As soon as those railroads and canals were in successful operation, lands went up at once to a higher price.

I have spoken of the immense value of the opening of these great thoroughfares to the States of Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Let not the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. MEACHAM] Suppose that there is one link in this great chain from the Green Mountains to St. Joseph, in the State of Missouri, that will be wanting. The energies of the American people are alive to this question. If this connection is not made by public lands, it will be made out of the private purses of capitalists. This undertaking will be completed. There is no doubt of that. And the only question now is, will gentlemen from the old States, who have a faint hope that by holding back they can advance the tariff interest, or that they may possibly get a portion of these lands for the old thirteen States, gain anything by so doing? It is not probable that any portion of those lands will ever be granted to the old thirteen States. The new States will never submit to itthe measure would be fraught with much evil and no good.

Mr. CHANDLER. Are we to understand the gentleman, that whether or not gentlemen from the Eastern States support these measures, they will get neither the advantages of a tariff nor any portion of the public lands?

Mr. FICKLIN. So far as I am concerned, I will candidly say to the gentleman that I cannot vote for his tariff.

Mr. CHANDLER. I have no tariff. But I heard the gentleman talking some time since about cutting down trees and rolling logs, and I want to know who it is who has been log-rolling in connection with this measure.

Mr. FICKLIN. I must say to the gentleman that I cannot join him in log-rolling.

Mr. CHANDLER. I do not ask it.

Mr. LETCHER. I should like to ask the gentleman from Illinois a question. I come from one of those old States, and I should like to understand whether the gentleman from Illinois, who says that these lands should be dedicated to a system of internal improvements, would be willing to vote the Virginia and Tennessee Railroad, or the Central Railroad of my State, a portion of these lands, if this general system prevails?

Mr. FICKLIN. I answer the gentleman by saying, that we propose to grant alternate sections along the line of the roads named in this bill, and I would be willing to grant alternate sections along the line of the roads which the gentleman has mentioned.

Mr. LETCHER. We have no alternate sections of public lands along the line of the road. Mr. JOHN W. HOWE. I want to ask the

gentleman if he proposes to bring the lands into the State of Virginia?

Mr. FICKLIN. It is about as probable that these lands will be transferred from the new States and placed, section by section, along the lines of the roads in the old States, as to suppose that they will be ceded to them. It is out of the question. It is bad enough for the General Government to be the proprietor of the lands in the new States; but they would not for a moment tolerate the idea of a sister State exercising similar pow

ers.

I will say to the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. LETCHER,] that the old States once owned these lands, and gave them up; and now I ask, does it come with a good grace from them to ask them back again?

Mr. AVERETT. I ask whether Virginia ever gave up her interest in these lands as one of the United States?

Mr. FICKLIN. She has ceded them away once, and now it would look childish for her to come here and ask them back again.

Mr. AVERETT: She has ceded them to the United States, but she has not ceded her right to them as one of the partners of the firm.

Mr. FICKLIN. The deed of cession of Virginia conveyed to the General Government all of her right to the Northwest territory, and all questions in regard to them are, of necessity, between the General Government and the States in which the lands are located. How long it may be before these twelve land States, with California, assert and maintain their right to these lands, remains to be seen. It will not probably be long. I will not detain the House longer.

Mr. ORR obtained the floor, but yielded it to Mr. ROBBINS, on whose motion the House adjourned until to-morrow.

PETITIONS, &c.

The following memorials, petitions, &c., were presented under the rule, and referred to the appropriate committees: By Mr. PARKER, of Indiana: The petition of George Catlin, that his American Indian Collection of Portraits, Dresses, Weapons, Ornaments, &c., be purchased by the Government, and thus secured to the American people.

By Mr. BRENTON: The petition of James S. Collins, an assistant marshal for taking the Seventh Census in Indiana, praying additional compensation.

By Mr. PARKER, of Pennsylvania: The memorial of Thomas Rees and 19 others, citizens of Blair county, Pennsylvania, praying for the establishment of an Agricultural Bureau by Congress.

Also, the memorial of W. L. Africa and 15 others, citizens of Blair county, Pennsylvania, of like tenor and import, By Mr. ANDREWS: The petition of Samuel L. Davis and others, for the erection of a light-house at Tenant's Harbor, St. George, Maine.

Also, one of Lucy B. Roberts, for a pension.

By Mr. BUELL: Three remonstrances, with 350 signatures, from Herkimer county, New York, against the renewal of the Woodworth patent.

By Mr. DAVIS, of Indiana: The petition of the President and Directors of the Mississippi and Atlantic Railroad Company, praying a grant of the right of way and a donation of a portion of the public lands, for the construction of a railroad from the State line, opposite Terre Haute, Indiana, to Illinoistown, on the Mississippi river, opposite the city of St. Louis.

Also, the memorial of John Cowgill, Elisha Cowgill, William Albin, and Andrew Johnston, of the State of Indiana, praying additional compensation for their services as assistant marshals in taking the Seventh Census.

By Mr. KURTZ: The niemorial of a large number of the citizens of York county, Pennsylvania, praying Congress to enact such laws as will more effectually preserve the sanctity of the Sabbath than those at present in existence. By Mr. FITCH: The petition of J. F. Stokes, assistant marshal of Pulaski county, Indiana, asking additional compensation for services in taking the census.

By Mr. LANE: The petition of Edward Jones and others, citizens of San Francisco, praying appropriations for the survey of the mouth of the Umpqua river, and for the erection of a light-house, and for other purposes.

Also, the memorial of the Legislative Assembly of Oregon, praying an appropriation for the improvement of the navigation of Tam Hill river, in said Territory.

Also, the memorial of the Legislative Assembly of Oregon, for the improvement of the Willamette river.

Also, the petition of R. M. Walker and 70 others, for a road from the Missouri to the Willamette river, in Oregon. Also, the resolutions of the Legislative Assembly of Oregon, praying for sundry amendments to the donation land law of said Territory, &c.

Also, the petition of citizens of Oregon, praying the purchase and survey of a portion of the country east of the Cascade range.

Also, the petition of citizens of Oregon, for amendment of land laws, &c.

By Mr. DOTY: The petition of Daniel W. Hubbard, for pay for carrying the mail from Green Bay to Copper Harbor.

Also, a petition for a mail route from Ripon, by Sacramento, Poysipi, Little River, and Weyanweya, to Mukwa, in Wisconsin.

Also, the petition of Chapin M. Seley, L. Leach, and

[blocks in formation]

Also, the petition of Edward Smith, R. C. Jones, and other citizens of Neenah, for a grant of land to aid the Rock River Valley Union Railroad Company in the construction of their road.

By Mr. HAWS: The memorial of Obadiah Newcomb and others, assistant marshals for taking the census in the city of New York, asking for an increase of compensation. By Mr. EDGERTON: The memorial of the assistant marshal of Van Wert county, Ohio, for additional compensation for taking the census.

By Mr. BOYD, of New York: The remonstrance of 87 citizens of Washington, New York, against the further extension of the Woodworth patent.

Also, the petition of sundry inhabitants of Warren county, New York, asking the establishment of a mail route from the town of Fort Ann, county of Washington, New York, to French Mountain post office, Warren county, New York, a distance of about twelve miles.

By Mr. McNAIR: The petition of Henry Jacobs and others, of Montgomery county, Pennsylvania, and also the surviving officers, soldiers, seamen, and marines, and the widow and children of those deceased who have served in the war of 1812, praying Congress to modify the bounty land act of September 28, 1850, so as to give to each of the persons intended to be benefited by said act not less than one hundred and sixty acres of land.

By Mr. STEVENS, of Pennsylvania: The petition of citizens of Franklin county, Pennsylvania, remonstrating against the extension of the patent of Parker's waterwheel.

Also, a memorial by a large number of the citizens of Lancaster county, Pennsylvania, protesting against the renewal of the patent of Parker's water-wheel.

Also, two memorials by a large number of journeymen cigar-makers of Hanover and York, York county, Pennsylvania, stating that under the present tariff foreign cigars are largely imported into this country, greatly to the injury of the petitioners and other citizens, and praying that the tariff may be so modified as to protect them from foreign competition.

Also, a memorial of the late quarterly meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, stating that the fugitive slave law is immoral and unjust, and praying for its repeal.

By Mr. GAYLORD: The petition of Daniel Kinney and 27 other citizens of Washington county, Ohio, asking a donation of a portion of the public domain for the benefit of education in the Independent School Association of the Commonwealth of Wesley.

Also, the petition of Milton Smith and 25 other citizens of Washington county, Ohio, on the same subject.

By Mr. ALLEN, of Illinois: Two petitions, of John T. Jones and others, and Thomas Boswell and other citizens of Gallatin county, Illinois, for right of way and donation of land to aid in the construction of a railroad from Shawneetown to a point opposite St. Louis.

By Mr. MACE: The memorial of John M. Hill and John Field, of Fountain county, Indiana, asking additional compensation as assistant marshals in taking the census.

FRIDAY, February 20, 1852.

Prayer by Rev. LITTLETON F. MORGAN.

On motion by Mr. WALKER, it was

Ordered, That the order of the Senate, assigning Friday of each week to the consideration of private bills, be suspended until one o'clock this day.

On motion by Mr. HUNTER, it was

Ordered, That one thousand of the additional copies of the report of the Secretary of the Treasury on the finances, heretofore ordered to be printed, be for the use of the Treasury Department.

PETITIONS.

Mr. SEWARD presented the memorial of David Hull, praying the establishment of a tribunal to review the decisions of the late Board of Commissioners for the settlement of claims of American citizens against Mexico; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Mr. WADE presented four memorials of assistant marshals for taking the Seventh Census in Ohio, praying additional compensation; which were referred to the Committee of Claims.

Mr. JONES, of Iowa, presented a petition of citizens of Iowa, and the proceedings of a meeting of citizens of Salem, in that State, in favor of donations of land to the Dubuque and Keokuck, and Davenport and Council Bluffs Railroads; which were ordered to lie on the table.

Mr. FOOT presented the petition of Eliza Ann Ellison, only child and heir of David Lund, praying a pension for the services of her father in the last war with Great Britain; which was referred to the Committee on Pensions.

Also, a remonstrance of citizens of Rutland county, Vermont, against the further extension of Woodworth's patent; which was referred to the Committee on Patents and the Patent Office.

Mr. MILLER presented a petition of citizens of New Jersey, praying that the introduction of foreign convicts, felons, and paupers, into this

« AnteriorContinuar »