North Carolina Newspapers

T TV- f L .war .V 5v ' -an. -a X- SPEECH OF BOH. Hi I. 1H1W, or NORTH CAROLINA, On the distribution of tit puilic lands; delivered m tht Muse of Representatives, May 29, ' 1854. Tiie House, os in the Committee of the Whole ontuestute of the Union, having under con sideration the Pacific railroad bill. Mr Bow in the chair Mr Shaw said : Mr Chaiwiak : I regret that 1 1uJ.il. i.r Bfirv to neennv in flu iHa...,.,..;... ! if one a? Jeen seTapB, nny portion ol the tune which has been by a special, order for the U."." "s-. as been another: and nv rrt tC. "J:7"r " ...j "-p..-- .o uc gii-uicr uecause v "ibiiu irom uamornia, Air DcDougnll 1 with irrent llhernlilv . .... ..,... ...,c.ij,, cuiiaeuiea more than once to the postponement of his bill, iu order that we might go on with one that has occupied so mnni of the time and attention of this body: but i have desired for some tiuio to add, th. oomm.ttoe upon the subject of the public lands, una I feel loiistrained in vnil n..ipp.i.:. ..... vn.,H,,jr innx nas been afforded me A d ye t, after t e 8bl. gumet rmjrje by my frigid from Ohio, Mr Disucy.l I annroach ., ! .am i:ve cnted.Vvself with .riving . : ' . r.7Al?J "Pon t&iB offered bv theBnti. w,irt 7. jut tor the speech made ' Lf"J boj-regrel C.. hfC--Il i sift MlMl smTlT abounds In erroneous statements, unteuable cioua renaoniiiir. assumptions, mid falla- There is much, howcvlvhot my colleague litis sam, ana wen -" Vf-il, 1 may say oil he has said in regard to the common and equal right of all (tie States in the public domain in . winch l tuny concur. I know that an effort was at one time made to set up a claim iu favor of the new States to nil of the public lauds within their limits, but it met with little favor even in thoso Slates them selves; and 1 presume there is no one upon this floor who will controvert the proposition that the public domain ol this country is l be common property of nil the Stntcs, and ought to be dis posed of for the common benefit of nil. The nature of our government, the conditions upon which the several States are united together, the terms upou which the seven old States ceded their lands to the general government, and the manner in which the balance of the public do main has been acquired, arc altogether sufficient to rentier any argument to prove the correct ness of this proposition quite superfluous. Sir, in a constitutional government like ours, where the only hope of a lustitig union depends upon a strict adberce to the letter and spirit of that sacred compact by which the several Stntcs are united together ns so many confed erated republics, the federal legislature should carefully abstain from the exercise ofan un warranted or even a doubtful power, especially v'kii tlio public safety or the public interest iocs not call for it, as in a mere question of policy in regard to the management of the pub lic Inn Is. The master-spirits who originated the policy of distribution devoted no little pains in their efforts to prove the constitutionality of that system. How has my colleague disposed of this important question? Simply by quoting the second clause of tho third section of the fourth article of the constitution, and reuding a paragraph from a speech made by my friend from South Carolina, Mr Orr, made, as I ulmiBim, in support or wnat J believe all make erants of alternate sections of the public lands, to aid in the construction of railroads by which the reserved sections would be en hanced In value, and such as could not other wise be disposed of rendered salable. , When the great leader of the whig party, Mr Clay, undertook to defend the constitutionality of distribution, he was accustomed to exert all the energies of his mighty intellect in arguments deduced from the constitution and drawn from the deeds of cession. My colleague makes short work of it; he reads a clause from that instru ment, quotes the gentleman from South Caro lina, and complacently reposes from his labor. And what is there in the clause of the constitu tion upon which he relies, and which is now the .only authority upon which tho friends of this system depend, which authorizes uougress to make any such disposition of the public lands? "Oiavrrefw Bhall havu power to dinpote of, and make all iieouTrtl rules ami rtulationa respecting, the terrl tut y or other properly belonging to the United Staten." Now, I apprehend that, if this clause proves anything to the point, it proves too much, anil therefore proves nothing; tor it will be observed that the same power is given to Congress over the " other prnjierty" that is given over the pub lic lands; and I desire to ask my colleague if he believes that Congress has the power to dis tribute among the States the forts, arsenals, magazines, navy-yards, the ships of our uavy, and all the other property in the possession of the government? Why, sir, this construction would involve the power to impose taxes upon the people for the purpose of purchasing lauds to distribute among the people again; and equally the power to take money out of the treasury to distribute in the same way I lam sure that he will contend for no such monstrous doctrine, Give to the constitution such a con struction, and you establish for Congress- the power to do all that I have said to dispose of, and divide among the States, ill the property belonging to the confederacy, even this Capitol in which wo aro now deliberating a power to whiclt.there would be no limit, except K wild aur constitution ii ouooiWti well defined. Yon cun'dispose of the public lands, and appropriate the money in the same way you can money drawn from the people by taxation, for my legitimate object which the constitution authorizes Uongrcss to accomplish and no more, As to tlje authority drawu from the speech ot my friend from South Carolina, I am sure that gentleman will tell my colleague that no speech which he ever made can be cited in support of the constitutional power of Con gress to distribute the proceeds of the sales of the public lands, or to divide the lands them selves, without a perversion of its meaning md intent. 7 But let me come now to tho expediency of distribution. My colleague says he is iu favor of distribution of the proceeds arising from the . sales of the public lands, or a division of the lands themselves, among all the States accord- . iii'j to their representation upon this floor." Isow, I think I shall be- able to show that, by such a policy, the greatest injustice would be done to North Carolina, in common with all tho , slaveholding States: and, further, that it would violate the terms of the deeds of cession, and the very principle which he himself saya should govern iii the management of the land thud. It would do Injustice to North Carolina and the other slaveholding States, becaiwe. while the nou-slaveholding States would receive of the land fund In thj proportion of tbeir entire . population, the slaveholding States would only he entitled to receive in the proportion of their free population, with three-fifths of their slave population added thereto. Nor would tin. h. justice and inequality stop there. My friend tens us, in nut Speech, that the slaveholding "'7 vouMiuuio mo-uiirun oi ine revenue by which the expenses oi the government are de frayed, and with which the immense nnl.lii. .In. ...,.. u..i uuUimi uas oeen purchased: and yet, in the distribution, he would give to those non-slaveholding States, which, according to his calculation, have onlv naiil nim.tlur.i r i the cost of these lands, a ranch larger share than UldUure to NorthMnrolinu ami tl. nil... he saHiave paid Ir. 01 itrihtitlyu 'lll. u have at different periods been offeree! Iiere bv lliu fl.lnn.lD aP .I... . it ml .... . . juncy. ino um oflercii by Mr Clay in 1832 discriminated in favor of the new States by giving to several of them half a million of acres of the lands and liftepn per cen tum of tho proceeds of the union hnfarn . distribution was made, and then an equal share in the balance, according to federal population. Similar discriminations in fnvnr nf n man St at no characterized tho act of 1841. And how was it, sir, with the laud bill offer ed by the gcntlemnu from New York in the Inst Congress, which was sunnorted li nnr whin. friends generally in North Carolina, was voted for by tho gentleman who is nnw ihr.iV r.niii.it for Governor lin that State f Biifthat bill do Annul nil1n...N...i! XT . t . J2 j;."" rvwTKry'Miiiu. aaol 7'.i Sinv sifflKsTlIe onlv TOTntTTrlo nnon wbicirhe (s willing to divide, and the only -principle upon which a division can be made without a gross violation oi trust. Sir, that bill proposed to give to North Carolina which has eight representatives upon this floor, one million ire hundred thousand acres of the public lands; and to Arkansas, which has only two represen tatives, mm miltumsoj acres; to Virginia, which lias thirteen representatives upon this Jtoor, two million two Itmulretl and ttctnty-jitt thousand acres ! And yet my colleague, who is in favor of a division of the public lands among all the states according to their representation upon this floor, and who declares that any other mode of division would bo " a gross violation of trust," was an advocate ot mat bin I There are still other and weighty objections to a division of the publiu lands among tho States which might be urged with great force such us the serious and interminable dihicul. ties that would bo occasioned by one State own ing lands within another; the sacrifice that would be made of the lands by tho immense quantity which would at once be put in market by the thirty-one States, all owning lands, and all anxious to realize something from them, by which the lands would be brought down so low that the moneyed capitalists of tho country would be enabled to buy up largo bodies of them, equal in extent to tho possessions of the lordly barons ol Europe in the feudal ages, and who, having ample means to do so, would hold on to them until they could extort from the hardwork ing settler perhaps twice or three times the amount now fixed as the government price. lo prove that this policy would violate the deeds of cession of North Curolina and the other Slates, I need do no more than recite the terms of the deeds. I shall content myself by quoting from tho deeds of Virginia and North Carolina, which arc precisely similar in their terms and accord with those of the other five States. Tho deed made by North Carolina reads thus: " The lands pball liecotmldcrrd as aeonimon fund for the use and binclit of tho United Sink's of America, Nortti Carolina hioluslve, uncording to their respective -fci ... -eihatu IB fcyr-i.l 1 . i f , x , diluro, and shall be faithfully dltvoaod of for that pur pose, and for no otlier use wnauoever." March 1, 1184, Virginia made her deed of cession in tho following words : " That nil the lands within the territory, as ceded to the United Slates, and not reserved for, nor appro priated to, any of the before mentioned purposes or disposed of lr bounties to the officers and soldiers of the American aruiy, snail oe consmereu as u common iuiiu for the use and benefit of such of the United States as linvn Itfwnmn. or shall become, members of this con federation, or federal alliance of said States, Vir ginia Inclusive, according to their respective and usual iironortions in tho neneral charge and expenditure, and shall ho faithfully and bona lido disposed of for that purpose, and for no other use or purpose whatsoever." Now, I need hardly say that my friend will never be able to show that his system of dis tribution is consistent with the conditions so distinctly and explicitly set forth in the deeds, which declare that "the lands shall be consid ered a common fund for the nsc and benefit of all the States, according to their usual propor tions in the general charge and expenditure, and shall be faithfully and bona fide disposed of for that purpose, and for no other purpose whatsoever." AO reasoning is necessary to sus tain me in this position; simply to state tho case is the strongest argument that can be made. ' . Now. I think I have shown that my colleague and i s political friends in Aorta Carolina, in cluding their present candidate for governor, have been in invor oi mo passage oi a um uy which according totay colleague's own showing, the rankest injustice would have been done to that State, and the terms upon whicli she ceuett her lands to the general government would have been grossly violated. If, on the other hand, tne public lunus ue retained by the general government, brought into market gradually as they should be, and the proceeds arising from their sales placed in tiie treasury and used for the ordinary expenses of government, and in paymeut of the national debt, for which they were pledged by the act of January, 1847, and tho taxes upou imports re duced pro tanto, the States will not onlybe a .'i p, k..n . 1 .i..siiji sentry show,) but the fund will be distributed, as my friend very correctly contends It should be, among all the States "according to their usual proportions in the general charge and ex penditure." And here let me say that neither the ingenuity of my colleague, the wisdom of this House, nor the combined sagacity of tho country, will ever be able to devise any other mode by which the true principle laid down by my colleague, and earnestly insisted upon by him, of distributing this fund so that each State will receive "according to her usual proportion in the general charge and expenditure," can ever be carried iuto practice. ' i -' If time were allowed me I might strengthen my position by citing the highest authority to show that our land system is the very best that has been or cm be divised; but I Will now give the opinion of Mr Clay only, whose authority as to the wisdom of that system will have great weight with my friend. ' Mr Clay said t ; ' " And If there be, In the oporatlens of this govern ment, one which man than any other displays con sulate wisdom and statesmanship, it Is that by which the public lands have been 10 aucceaifuIlT administer ed. We should pouM, oloranl ; pause, before we tnb vert It. We should touch It hesitatingly and with tho Rentlesthaaa, The prudent management ef the pub c leads, la the hands of the fcneral fOTenunat, will be more manifest bv eoetraatiaa it with that of mint of the States, which ad the dlipol ef large bodlea of waste laaas." jaaei, un ; . " Wo might hen patue, and wonder that there should to a dUiwdtknt to waste or throw awar thla treat rt- laource, or to aboil A a tystem which has been fraught wiiiio fnaay raaniren aanunagea." oi w, ihi. THE NORTH CAR0U4l(,lFAYETTEVILLB But my Mend will no doubt would all be well enoho-h tint ! have been squandered among the oe; uuu iu an probability will continue to J snan speak presently of what has been 4 to the future. I bid him to tak have now a democratic nriniliiitr,.ti has already signalized itself by giving Vnal check to a bill tending to upset aod lrov that system which Mr Clay characti one ui me greatest wisdom ancT stntosi so far no bill lias Dassed d vei-tino or the public lands from the legitim proper objects since this administration n power. I have an abidini lion that th? aim uruiouox views so ably sot forO. .oiu uitgaiiiru ui rresiueni 1'ierce will to be the guiding light of his administrn regard to this subject. It may bo suggested that we ha'vo' surplus in the treasury, and therefore fund might well bo distributed. I will say, in reply to this, that if we havej we havo also a national debt of abnnt nous ot dollars, for which has been solemnly ptodnd the Committee of Ways and gaged in revising tho tariff, ing the duties to the wanta at tha Of course, If the land fund is distributed prevent such a reduction of the taxv" tAly'iJU to ,1 ' Although it is not a matter pertinTu discussion oi tuis question, i wish tB, ",cc0 what my colleague nas said in regardj0 tic cost of tho public lands, which lie puts dwn t $500,000,000. When I listened to his su, I was astonished at the statement, and iLjous to know how he made out the figures. an examination of the table contained in bis p ;n(cj speech, it is obvious to mo that ho cotilc iave made the snm twice ns largo had lie bi . 80 inclined. Hut here is the statement, and T0. pose now to analyze it. First, among the items that cannot pn ,crv be charged to the cost of tho public la (B that of $11,851,121 interest on tiie amount L,a;( for Louisiana and Florida, and the union n pa;(i Georgia, which should be deducted, fo . tle twofold reason, that the government fa I ...,n account of interest, and becauso no crt jt (, givcu on the other side of the account (Lr . tcrcstonthe sum of $138,000,000, wliiul ,,. colleague admits has been received foi"lu(B already sold. P . Next come the two items, amonnU'V to $102,188,005, for extinguishing Indian .'jW Now, I find, by examining the report of tli uomtnissioncr oi me ueiicrui iiiuu umcci the amount paid on this account tip to Jai 1850, one year later than my friend's at is made up to, is set down nt $35,68! Here, then, is a small mistake of $06,59 which should also be deducted. Then we $18,253,064 for army expenses. By what rect principle this is made a part of the 6 tho public lands, I cannot imagine; at ever cost it may have been and I can b believe it amounted to $4,500,000 ami this force has been kept up for the proteci our citizens in the Territories, and yoii with equal propriety charge the expenses vour territorial governments to the cost public funds. And next, to cap the clnn collcairue has put down the snug little fit $211,000,000 for the war with Mcxicol only surprised that ho did not add the t the revolutionary war, ana innioi ibt shaH not enter into any argument lie" for the protection of American rights, ji defence oi tne national nouor, wnoae u cause was the invasion ot our torrltor pollution of our soil by tho hostilo foot foreiirn foe. and the shedding the blood nA....in ehniiui nnr. he riiftrffcn as a nori the cost of the public lands. I should feel I was trilling with the committee; nnd I nnlv add further that the total cost ol the V uublic domain, as given by the Commif of tho General Land Office, amounts to sum of $61,121,111, making a general avi of about fourteen cents per acre; and to burse tliemsclves for this expense thus in. tho States now have a common interest n immense domain, which amounts to neajj teen hundred millions of acres, embracing tory sufficient to make two or three might nires. Nor should I omit to mention tkVJ government has already received, as my e truo suvs. $138,000,000, more than twin! whole cost of the lands, which has gone iu'J treasury, and North Carolina and the States have been benefited by It "occon their nsnol proportions iu the general ci nn.) Avnenditure." -.--.' All that my friend has said, then, lne! to tho cost ol tlio public inuus, ouu Hie pi tlnn which North Carolina has cotltribnl u'lilMi ho linfl nver-estimatcd. as -lie bast calculation upon the untenable aMuniptionljhat Norh Carolina exports, in the direct ratio tfber nn noini ation. comnnrcd witn tne siavepu- lation of Louisiana, Alabama, and Missitfppi, and the other planting States amoun to nothing at all, and has no bearing wha upon the real question at Issnc. As, how ever ver, he has made a calculation to show how puch North Carolina has paid is her proportiej by which he arrives at the conclusion mat si been taxed to the amount of $11,09; has 16, without ever having been compensated ro- for, which of courso is aitogetner erron will now show from tlio record mat Carolina, in common with nil the other rth ites, Ima received moro than the has paid on ti innt 0,thal4inl..ll.f .".Jf paid into llrffreasdt: AW "TO from the sales of the the public lands, above their total cost, $53,289,465. Carolina has thereby been benehtted by omption from taxation, at least in the u tion of her representation on thla floor, a clear gain to her of $1,814,824. " In this connexion let me correct a very mon error which prevails that is. thai general govemmeut derived great poena"? ailvantnirn frnm 'tlin 'PflRitlnrinnlita Ii in'tll Carolina. I do not mean to OTderr magnanimity of that act.: No.llr! North Una, with a patriotism that entitles her to. lasting honor, offered up npon thi.f Itar of1 her wnoie domain, now coustitntif t tne of Tennessee. Actuated by a nob, del elevate the public credit, promote haO0 pAinAnt thn nonds' of union' arnaho lhA't iH offered it np freely, and generoni tur - triotic was the act. ' But the ireneraTco ment never realhted snv ' tiieeuuiarv adv, the public I : and. furthrf fii8 ire i UtA desia i from the ceulon, will r appear; mm g ' " ment I have here, obtained from "tl , .Office : yv.ti ,! But, while my eollcajrae admits that t! 1 which ! advocate would be wise and 1 could it be carried out, he urges that "f have been, and in all probability, will ( to be, sqnandered hmong thenew Siat -the old States will get nothing;". Wo1 1 of this declaration, he tart thtt 0 ' and twenty-nine millions of iicna of I. lands havo .been given, Mtualljr e're ' l . V ' --5 t . -. . . ; I'-.'AX ' . f - , A ' N, C. " ST:", of lands, or pro- r eanotntug.eiiu.. . . . 1Bhoun- aerwaw . - T om otter T amazeu to examine, vv ny, " r " " . tu0ughtless that my friend should have been fcrtion. . inwinaiderate as tomako any sucu u o-Prrtl,mlth; .ii,,o nmat Know inui r.l,.Tn,rhr Carolina" and the other "oio States'' hve therefor been benentea o; . BtBtfA, to their usual proportions not undertake to deny that tht Pi 7 W?Ta?:Z iasunifonnly made witntne .u.u -- .,.; of tueir them liberal g --: ,.anina t0 stipulating not to . h(j B . . , ... UBuallyimposea . r7-;--- o t,,e moreover, p " the Mles 0f the country, ana ...en.- 7 - &oM is !"wto'r'JK. correct in itself, has been overstraiucu. ' lint owaoc" Tie make school iiurr5s7T1iiTw:J,".'4iM It is too lato, I apprehend, to object to grants proper extent for these objects; they have been made from the first, nnd every new State that has come Into the Union has received lands for these purposes, grunted by Congress not ns free gifts to the States and Territories, but as a means or attracting seiners aim enhancing me value of the public lands generally; they have beeu voted for by all parties, and, so fur as I have had time to examine the journals, they havo nasscd without even a division. The some may be said of tho grants for seals of govern ment mill public uniinings, amounting 10 o.j, 798,254 acres granted to Louisiana and other States. As to the swamp lands, they were acknow ledged, on all sides, to be useless to tho gen eral government ; they could not be disposed of at any price. I shall not go over the ground so ably occupied, some time since, both by the gentleman from Virginia Mr linyly, and the gentleman from Ohio, Mr Disney, who show ed very conclusively that there was no other course; they were considered a nuisance by the citizens of the Stutcs Iu which they lay, which the government ought to rid them of. The gentleman from Louisiana Mr Perkins stated that those in that Stute had becu drained since the grant was made at nn expense of $8 per acre. And I hardly think my colleague, or any one else, would havo voted an appropriation equal to that sum for the purpose ot draining them, in order to render them salable. I have examined the iournnls only in refcrenco to one of these bills, that granting 8,900,010 acres to Arkansas, and I Ami that ueither Mr Badger nor Mr Mnneum thought these lands worth calling the ayes and noes on. 1110 bin passed the Scunte without a division, while in the House it was voted for by Messrs Outlaw Stanlv. and Climrmnn. Tho table contniucd in the speech of my colleague shows, also, that grants havo been made for "military services" amounting to 24,- 841,919 acres, and that these grants have been .l.Ji. .t.! n,,,l vnt nntl,i, trrciifllt6-ttic err'arWfljiposTrigrtianiirse Jruta have been made to these particular States. he when, in fact, they are nothing more than the bounty lands which a generous and irrutcful nation has bestowed upon the brave nnd patrio tic sons of America, who perilled their lives upon many a bloody field, and bore aloft to victory the stars and stripes of their country and among the rest, the bold sons of our own Carolina, who having already received, on ac count of their services to their country, nearly 400,000 acres of these very grants, which my colleague seems to flunk were made to tho new States. ' My colleague says that several millions of acres of the public lands hnvo been granted for Internal Improvements in tho new States, and asks, "why is it unwise and unconstitutional to make grants for improvements in North Carolina, when it is wiso and constitutional to make grants for similar improvements in Illi nois." I will tell my colleague; it is because the general government owns no lands iu North Carolina, mid does own largo bodies of lauds in Illinois; and because, by granting lands in alter nate sections to aid in the construction of im provements in that State, through the govern ment lands, the lands reserved by the govern ment aro enhanced in value; and such us had been many years In market without hading a purchaser arc thereby rendered salable. To illustrate: suppose that the general government owned the lands along the proposed route of the western extension ot the A orth Carolina Cen tral railroad, could not Congress grant alter nate sections of those lands, either to North Caroliua or to a company who would undertake to complete the work, to aid in its construction? And does not my colleague believe, and does not every man in North Carolina know, that the reserved sections would be so much enhanc ed In value that the government would lose nothing by the grant? Surely no argument is necessary to convince my countrymen of so plain a proposition. ' ,1ut says my friend, "experience proves that ""(orce m this argumoninmaielelW were. Krauica 10 lunioia. MiiBiimi. and Alabama, for the Illinois Central railroad, 3,151,111 acres of the public lands; that the reserved sections wero brought iuto market in Jnly, 1852) Ad yet, up to the 30th September, leas, oniy XBf ,uu acres had been sold at double price, and the amount received over the ordinary price was only $1155,100 to repay the 5 overt ment for the grant made to those States, low, I woold ask my colleague in all kindness, for I hare, as he knows, no other than kind feelings towards him, if this is a fair mode of arguing thuv. question? , Why, sir, any one un acquainted With the facts would infer, from realltuj this part or his speech, that this was all th government ever would receive; and yet no Ohejuowi better than, my friend,, that these lpi haveouly been in market since July, 1852; yS.hat himself so stated; and that the balance rtftKn aaaunA lanllAni, fi.w alw milts t-" Li road on both sides, through its whole- length wherever it ram through the public lands, still remain to bo told at $2 50 per acre, nnd they am now being bought up at tint price, is I am Informed, as Tint 11 the land agents can do the bnsJneis-tujch being the press upon some of the oSccn that they bare been compelled to close ,:lhe.r doors from time to time in order to bring S jhwlnew up. But, says my colleague, "the ..ct only requires' these reserved sections l he , rsrf at the double price before they ire sold ,tlieordinirjr: rate;" actually italicising tho words "to be offered," thereby plainly intlmat 'j that they would never be told for more than i S6 per acre. Now,-1 desire to ask my , ') " ' , T:r:?rf!Srnuted among" the States according to the prm- LCOlieiuruu Vv,-1. . i in know ClDies ui iuw..v - u grant was matter n - - - ,Arved Sat it expressly declares that thus p reserved Bections shall not be .JTf i ...in -mid the third section : if ha niui iiu uuitii i It per acre. " ,".. Th. lno sections "Sco. 3. AM ne it iu"u" r -routs, and parts rtm.f.&ajLfEIl oi. snan remain - , ,i not be so u iur .una wi" uu,1", lands when sold." .,m(.t But my colleague says u" - - tion at these erants increase iue " -abvl.lo such as had occn iu..g , - ...j i.,i,i.. such as natt oecu i. fnt in the case, as ho aiieinpva taincd by l;"e tY,t in 1 886, before this to prove by showing u "7 0,1 acres of the public 'anu - v- ' po wcro only it had been put . PKttirmlin. if colleague, 1 trail u i ,n.e to be anactot pucr m y - here, before this intciiige nr - t0 have now the honor of addressing, to M to 1 now tue nonor u. o; .- ' . ...u. which operated ? cWrZ7J. : Mcland. i 1836, to tncreaso u.c ---r". .. . ,, in 1952, or those which tenaea -- - hi8 Why, sir, every -J T j, oiita kuow, that we had 1 most r.llnnrv stt of thlniM u Jli3(i. llia. With li.-n7ddeiitolM-Bapcr circula tion to more than $140,000,000. In addition to this, abput $200,000,000 hud been borrowed in Kurope by the States engaged in enrrying on internal improvements; money became as plenti ful ns "blackberries in June;" prices of every description of property rose Inordinately high; one wide-spread, reckless spirit of speculation pervaded the whole country, and millions of acres of the public lands were taken np by speculators, swelling sales to nn amount alto gether unprecedented before, and which, it is to bo hoped, will never be reached again. To iiccoiint for the fulling off during the fis cal year 1852, when the sales amounted to only 1,083,495 acres 1,852,123 being the average of the live years preceding that when the alter nate system went into operation I need only say that the lands located with bounty-laud warrants and other ccrtilicntes iu that year amounted to 0,151,187 acres; and ony one who is not "a scurvy politician" (and I do not menu to apply this term to my colleague) can see without spectacles why the sales should have fallen off 109,228 acres below the average, when the enormous quantity of 0,151,181 acres were taken up with military land warrants during that year. Hero let me call the attention of my friend to the inconsistencies of his statements in re gard to the sales of tho alternate sections. He lirst states that the railroad svstcm went into operation in July, 1852, ns it did in the case of the Illinois net: and yet, subsequently, when attempting to show that the sales hud not in. creased under that system, he says that the system had been in full operation two or three vcurs prior to tho 1st Januarv, 1853. Now, am sure tlint my colleague fell into this error not designedly, but from having unfortunately adopted, without proper examination, the loose statements mode by the gentleman from New York, Mil. Uhnnett. I will show by better authority than that quoted by my friend that the results of this system have been very different from what he says. In his lust report, the Secretary of the Interior says he Interior savs: law been found by cxperluuoc to bo most nilutnry. ri'urm in tut- improvi-mcms inane W1IU SUCH grants, ntrge tracts 01 .amis mat nail long lain waste have been brought into market nnd found a ready sale; the surrou nding country lias lieen uconlcd: and the revenue lias been augmented by the increased consumption of lore.gn inercnanuise. tne government bus never .undo such a donation without being fully repaid. 'During the half year ending 31st December, 1830, ine quantity 01 minis soiu unit located (in Illinois, in the ilistrict traversed by the central mini) ivns iUAKl ncres. The alternate sections reserved lo the 1'nlleri States were brought into market in Jnly, August, and September, iKfi, una miring that and tho next succeeding quarter the sales nail locutions amounted to 1.274,522 acres; showing an increase over the cor responding hull' year next preceding the location of uie roan 01 v.tz.u.it acres. "The quantity sold at Augusta district, Mississippi, ia September, IS III, mis only 424 aeresi and in the same month, III the years lH.iU-'M. and 'M, much less; anil yet In live days in September last, after the route of the road had been established, lti.frlo nerea were sold. In the Columbus district, in twelve davs in Sep tember Inst, zviui acres were disposed ot; whereas, in the whole month of September, 1B49, tho quantity sold wax only 2,3,r8 ncres.-'' I might quote further to show that the sales in the railroad districts in Missouri from the 5th July to the 30th September, 1853, amounted to 150,000 acres more than were sold in the corresponding quarters in 1850-'51' and '62. So also along the route of the Simlt Sto. Jinric canal the sales in the second and third quarters of l32 amounted to only 4U,b8U acres, and in the corresponding quarters of 1853 they increased to 89,013 acres. Tho commissioner of the General Land Office, iu his Inst report, says "The great Increase In sales and locations of land for the lust liscal year, and in the third uuurtcr of the current calendar year, mentioned iu a former part of iuis report, nas occurreu in inose states M-aero railroads havo been projected nnd grants made for them, or wnero sucn works arc in contemplation, or by tlio pro. posed construction of the Sault Ste. Marie cunal." These statements, I suppose, will bo conclu sive on tins point, inasmuch as tlioy aro based upon the actual sales of the lost liscal year, compared with those of previous years; and they bold good, not In a single locality, but throughout, wherever this policy has been ap plied. By examination it will be found that rtlll moba ftvorahla Waulta bMWacu attaifoea during the current fiscal year, thejyales having amounteu. to ei.uun.ozu in tne-nrst naif, and to $1,146,163 in the third quarter, against zdoi.oua in tue lonrtu quarter of the Inst liscal vcar, showing a steady and rapid increase; und it is reasonable to expect that this increase will be still greater when the bountv-lnud warrants shall nave been exhausted. I do not mean, however, to say that this system Is not liable to abuse; but if restrained within proper limits nnd exercised with judgment and discretion, it would no doubt be attended with highly be neficial results to the land States, without de triment to the common interest. As this grant to the Illinois Central railroad seems te be the most objectlouable one in the estimation of my colleague, and that which more than all others creates a necessity for the change in our land policy which he advocates, it may be well to pause here a moment to in quire who are mainly responsible for this act. Why, sir, will It be believed that the verr ecn- tlemnn who has signalized himself as the advo cate for a divisiou of tho public lands on ac count of theso very grants, among others,- to gether with nearly every gentleman in Congress who is in favor of his project, voted for this very grant? Iu tho Senate, the two gentlemen who then represented the State of North Caro lina, Messrs. Badger and Mangnm, not ouly voted for the bill, but they wero so anxious to secure Its pnsssgo that they voted against the amendment offered by Mr Dayton, providing that' the proceeds of the sales of the sections reserved to the United States should bo distri- was sanctioned and approved J. y th model whig wblR President, so popular - friends in North uaro rtioM had too, after the um - . . c been killed in the House durin tl e last too. from North Carolma, voted for a view of this question to wliicU Itaw iocklenUlly nllu.led to whjen committee will indulge me, I w, 11 There is one very bricfly-timi is, -""";-,ont8ft pri. tariff. Myt'ouengue . -uU ciple as laid down uy m - d occasion here to.congrat W catholic his having acquired such soniiQ views upon tne tariu iui... law that the amount of Imports is nue ,'B ,.ftiM.a mount of exports; ana. w"" (. ., ca nl.own from duties upon y J xports of this country that two-thirds of the d' lh ropositioii is , imporUlspaldby . be labo of slave. , Upon this principle be nas ... , Tuts 111,111 Ian1 vc niicuu 01 mo. 1 iicitcve mat, according to the present system,, taxation falls very heavily and unequally upon the planting Statjtl am not prepared to say that tho incqak.- is as great ns my colleague mnlf it, who seems to have fully udoptcd whnt has been culled the furty-bido theory. But I shall now adopt his own premises. No one,"I feci assured, will deny that if tho money derived from the soles of th public lands be distributed among tho States, it will give riso to flic necessity of imposing an additional amount of taxation to supply tho delicit thus created; ami in supply- ing tins uelicit, my colleague says iwo-tuirus m the burden of taxation would full upon North Carolina and the oilier southern States; nnd yet he would persuade the people of North Caro lina that litis policy would be to their advan tage. But this is not all. 1 have already shown how tho southern States would be the losers necessarily iu this game of distribution, based upon representation iu this hall, by Which they would count onlytlirec out of live of their 6lave population, while the whole northern population would lie enumerated, nnd by reason of tho discriminations which have been made in all tlio distribution bills ever offered in Congress, and by the double amount of taxation they would be compelled to pay iu making np the deficit, whicli 1 have shown by data furnished by my friend's own speech; and 1 will now show that the loss to the southern States would not stop here. Suppose that the sales amounted to $3,000,000 per annum, os they no doubt will on nn average: let this fund lie distributed n mong the States, you would fheii be compelled to raiso the tariff" high enough to nuike up tho deficit. Now. to get $3,000,000 into the trea sury yon would be compelle.Uo impose a tax of $3,300,000, because it costs the government 10 per cent, to collect the revenue; $3,000,000 of whicli would go info the treasury of tho United States, and $1100,000 into the pockets of government ofliciuls engaged in collecting the revenue. Nor would the loss slop here; for supposing that additional tax to be levied upon some "igj11,, 11mm Kiime article to niiicu 11 annual u.io lomestic manu facturer to raise the price of flic honic-inndo article, and it the quantity or Hint article con sumed in tho United States should only bo double that of the imported one, nnd the increase of the price should only be equul to one-half of the tax imposed npon that imported, the result ' would bo that the consumers that is, the peo ple generally would be compelled necessarily to pay $3,000,000 more, which would go, not into your treasury, but into the pockets of th manufacturers. I regret that I htivc not tiino to elubornto this argument; but, viewed in any light, this policy of distribution can never be anything but nn unmixed evil to the southern States, nnd can only benefit those interested in the protec tive system, of which distribution "is a part, being nothing moro nor less than a protective measure in disguise. My colleague, in the course of his speech, in dulged in n piece of dry humor, with which I was highly amused. With a gravity altogether becoming a serious subject, lie made use of these words; "Had the principle of distribution been established, as was coatt'iided by a great party in this country It should be, years ago. the blessings of education would have penetrated many an hnmble cottage where now no traces of them can ho found, but in their stead ignorance and misery." To my mind that passage equals anything to be found in the Pickwick papers. Lest, how ever, others may think he was serious, let mo ask, whose fault is it that this distribution pol- icy, over which he mourns, has not been adopt ed and carried out? My colleague, who ia very young, cannot go back with me in his memory and recall the events of 1840; but I, sir, who have almost(thank Heaven 1 not quite) reached " the age of the sere and yollow leaf," -remember tho circumstances which attended the mighty struggle of that year. , You remem ber thaUhe party to which my friend belongs made dCjfibu tion one of the issncs in that contest. My colleague has condensed into the brief par agraph I have read one of the "little stump sLcecligs" whjck hi. Criuiidmteu.tuen accustom. -ed'to mftes) , Jtony a timer .mi ftee-'did I " hear tnem acs.cribifin eloquent phrase the rich blessings, that would flow from their nolicv. Many Wife the promises they made to the peo ple of North Cauliua: the resources of the State wero to be developed, railroads were to .-. give every fanner a ready access to the markets, ; cdncatiou was to be diffused, and "its blessings were to penetrate many an humble cottage." All these benefits wero to flow from their policy of distribution which was to be carried out, if -the people would only place them in power. P Well, sir, they were borne into power like tho sweeping of a mighty avalanche. The people took them at their word. "Tippecanoe and ; Tyler too" were elevated to the two highest of fices in the gift of the people by an overwhelm ing majority: the whig administration was or- ganized, and they found themselves supported by a Urge majority in both ends of this Capitol. They had it ill, "King, Ciwder, and Glimis;1' iney were omnipotent ror evil or for good. Did - . thejr fulfil their promises? Did they redeem their pledges? 1 Did ther carrv out their nolicv of distribution, that policy which was to bring plenty to smiling land? "Tis true, and pity,' 'tis, 'tis true." they passed a bill to distribute V the proceeds of the sales of the public lends; -v but how? Like some wretched parent, afflicted 1 with an hereditary disease, they implanted in the system of their offspring the germs of its own Inevitable dissolution I They coupled with It a proviso to the effect that, whenever tha ' duty upon any nrticle imported into this conn- " ; vrj u twenty per. cenc atf morem, Dis tribution should cease; and. before the old . 4 At s'Vf "ft .