The Congressional Globe, Volume 14: Twenty-Eighth Congress, Second Session Page: 22
xv, 408, 421 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
22
CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
districts where the lands had been in the market for
more than twenty years, and where little or no
lands had been sold, in which the very best lands
were to be found. There were millions of acres in
the State of Illinois, that had been in the market for
more than twenty years, that were as good lands as
any in the State.
The gentleman from Alabama, [Mr. Houston,] he
presumed, might be able to show that in his State
there was a residuum of lands that would probably
never be sold at the present price. Now, where that
was the case, he would be for doing the best that
could be done with them, as was the case with the
lands in the State of Tennessee; but he could not
agree- that the length of time that lands had been in
the market was any criterion of their value.
He went on at great length to contend that this
bill would be no benefit to the poor settler, and it
would inevitably reduce the revenue from the pub-
lic lands. He was not aware of any law to require
this government to keep any particular quantity of
these lands iJi the market; and the keeping it there
inevitably tended to reduce its price, and he hoped
the government would issue a proclamation to with-
draw the lands which had been so long in the
market.
Mr. SAMPLE replied that, if the gentleman from
Vermont had known as much of these public lands
as the gentlemen from the western States, he would,
perhaps, have been less vehement in his opposition
to this bill. It was a fact of which, perhaps, the
gentleman might not be. aware, that there were lands
which had been subject to private entry for nearly
forty years; and in one of the oldest land districts in
the State which he had the honor to represent, there
were from one and a half to two millions of acres of
land that had not been, and would not be, sold un-
less some reduction was made in the price at which
they were offered. The gentleman from Vermont
alleged that there was no residuum of poor lands;
but that was established by the fact alone that they
had so long remained unsold; and he would add
that, so long as good fresh land can be obtained in
the Territories of Iowa and Wisconsin, and the
States of Illinois, Michigan, and some others, at
§1 25 per acre, the farmers would remove to those
States and Territories where they could obtain land
of better quality. The object of all communities
was to become as densely populated as the nature of
their circumstances would permit: this was their
wise policy, inasmuch as it was promotive of their
security and comfort, and general welfare; but, by
maintaining the present pricc, the lands were
less attractive to purchasers than those in the other
States to wh'ich he had referred, and he would ask
the House if they should persist in a policy which
held out inducements to their population to leave
them, and to go to the Oregon, Wisconsin, and else-
where. But if the price of these lands were re-
duced, a revenue would be derived to the govern-
ment, and the States and communities in which they
were situated would also be greatly benefited. As
a citizcn of the State of Indiana, as one of the rep-
resentatives of that State in this House, and as a
citizen of the United States, he called upon the
House to pass this bill. It was a measure in which
his constituents were deeply interested; it was a
measure in which the entire West was interested.
The States of Alabama, Illinois,* Missouri, and
others likewise, were interested in it, and they all ap-
pealed to Congress to pass this bill. Justice and
common sense were alike favorable to the passage of
this bill. In the State in which these lands now
lay, no profit was derived to the State nor good to the
people; but once sold, and a revenue was derived
from them; they became occupied by citizens who
added to the sum total of a population now sparse
and wide-spread; and they became subject to taxa-
tion, by which the community was able to derive
positive benefit. They, further, not only stopped
the tide of emigration still farther west, with all the
evils which ensued from the loss of their neighbors,
but those who remained were enabled to draw
around them friends and connections, and the com-
munity became the more consolidated, and society
improved. He again entreated the House to pass
this bill at so early a period that it might be sent to
the Senate and passed into a law before the close of
the present session.
Mr. J. W. DAVIS, like the gentleman from Ver-
mont, had not expected this discussion to come on
to-day, or he should have been prepared to set forth
the merits of this bill. He would, however, say
that with this measure he was well acquainted, for it
emanated from the committee of which he was
chairman, and he was satisfied that the positions
taken by the gentleman from Vermont, and the ob-
jections to it which he had urged, would not be con-
sidered valid by the House to any great extent.
The only platform on which the friends of this
bill could vindicate their claim, was that on which
alone every measure should be vindicated—the jus-
tice and equity of the measure itself; and a very
cursory examination of this bill would show that it
was but sheer justice that it should pass into
a law. The gentleman from Vermont had taken the
position that this bill was not framed to benefit the
poor. Now, according to. his (Mr. Davis's) no-
tions of justice to a community, they should mete
out justice without regard to the peculiar condition
of the various individuals composing it: but if a
man was so poor as to be unable to pay $1 25 per
acre for land, it appeared to him to be benefiting the
poor man, beyond all controversy, to enable him to
procure that land at twenty-five or fifty cents an
acre. If the gentleman from Vermont were as con-
versant with the people of Indiana as he (Mr. Da-
vis) and his colleagues were, he would not have as-
sumed the position which he had taken on this sub-
ject. It seemed, however, that the gentleman's
views of right, and especially his notions in regard
to the people of the West, were much more vitiated
than he "ad expected from a gentleman who was
generally so clear headed. But the views of that
gentleman were not. altogether new; at least they
were' not new to the Committee on Public Lands.
The gentleman from Vermont laid down the posi-
tion that this bill did not provide means for thore-
hef of thepoor; but the terms "rich" and "poor" were
relative terms. What was "poor" in the estimation
of one man, was not "poor" in the estimation of
another, and hence it was useless to argue on the
subject; but there were in Indiana many who are
called poor, who may be made rich—so far as a
man might be deemed rich who was an independent
landholder—by the passage of the law under con-
sideration. The gentleman from Vermont had al-
luded to the purchasers of 1836, and to the
losses -which they might sustain by the pas-
sage of this bill. Now, he (Mr. Davis) hoped
his friend was not one of those who were interested
in the speculations of that period; and he would say
to that gentleman, and to the House, that he hoped
the land speculations of 1836—of the difficulties in-
cident to which this House had had many exam-
ples—would be no obstacles to the passage of this
bill; for if the hardy yeomanry of Indiana were to
be subject to the caprice of the speculators of the
East and the North, or anywhere else, they would
have but a gloomy prospect of happiness and com-
fort before them, or of success in their underta-
kings. Putting the case on the ground of sheer
justice alone, a reduction of the price of these lands
was required. This was so self-evident, that it was
scarcely necessary to argue about it. Why, in the
district which he had the honor to represent, as had
been stated by his colleague, [Mr. Sample,] there
were at present not less than a million and a half or
two millions of acres of land unsold; and yet they
had been in the market, some of them, thirty-three
years, and others thirty-eight or thirty-nine. That
district of country was laboring under the evils of a
sparse population; and it could not be expected that,
in any reasonable time, land which had been so long
in the market could be sold at the price now asked
for the public lands. It was, then, but justice to
the community and to the State in which the lands
lie, that the price should be so reduced as to secure
a disposition of them. What gives value to these
lands? Did they suppose that lands in the western
settlements would be worth five cents an acre, if it
were not for some collateral circumstances which
made them so? Much of that land was purchased
from the Indians at two cents an acre, some at one
cent, and some as high as a dollar; but what now
made them worth anything? Why, it was in con-
sequence of the industry of the population which
surrounds the public domain. If they were now in
the western wilderness, would they be worth five
cents an acre? Certainly not. Was there not, then,
something due to that population whose energies,
and industry, and enterprise, had made them what
they were? Was there nothing to be gained by a
course of policy towards the western population by
which the price of the lands would be brought
down nearer to their intriasir value' The gentle-
man from Vermont had called attention to the fact
that $100,000 or more had been set apart annually
for surveys of the public domain; but if his (Mr.
Davis's) recollection served him truly, the amount
was not one-third of that sum. ' It was certainly
not one-third at the last session.
Mr. COLLAMER explained. The act of 1841
—he meant the pre-emption act—provided thai
$135,000 should be annually appropriated; and to
that he alluded, though he did not know whether
the average of expenditures had amounted to
#100,000.
Mr.-DAVIS continued: He said his recollection
coincided in part with that of the gentleman from
Vermont. As regarded the law of 1841 or 1842, if
his recollection was right, no such appropriation had
been made.
He differed with the gentleman when he said that
the fact that the lands were not taken was no crite-
rion that they were not good. He knew not to
what specific examples the gentleman referred; but
as far as Mr. D.'s knowledge extended, it was gene-
rally a safe criterion, and it required but little com-
mon sense to see that it must be because there was
no man, in selecting from a section of land, but
would select the best.
This bill provided for the reduction of prices only
to two classes of persons to settlers and actual cultiva-
tors. And he could not see that it was any argu-
ment against it, that a man already in occupancy of
a piece of land might be permitted to use a contigu-
ous portion of land, although he had paid $1 25 for
the portion first purchased.
Mr. D. apprehended that the gentleman, in stating
that there was about one hundred and thirty mil-
lions of land in market, had confounded the amount
in market with that purchased by treaty. His own
recollection was, that the amount in market was not
so great. But the gentleman had omitted to men-
tion one thing, viz: that the reduction on lands of
prime quality was only contemplated to be 25 cents
per acre; whereas he had seemed to base his argu-
ment on the assumption that all the lands alike were
to be reduced to 25 cents per acre. The graduation
provided for in this bill was not all at once from $1
to 25 cents, but a regular graduation, according to
the length of time the lands had been in market.
The gentleman from Vermont had thought proper
to allude to the subject of distribution. Mr. D.
would not detain the committee by giving his views
on that subject; but if the gentleman's object had
been, in calling into question the distribution princi-
ple, to rally in opposition to this bill those who were
in favor of distribution—
Mr. COLLAMER (Mr. D. yielding the floor)
explained that he had expressly declared that the
question of distribution, whether members were op-
posed or were friendly to it, could not operate upon
this bill; for, according to his view of it, its effect
would be to reduce the price of all lands in the Uni-
ted States, whether belonging to individuals or to
the government,
Mr. DAVIS, resuming, said that he would say,
then, in regard to the principle of distribution, that
the friends of the bill did not expect to derive any
advantage from the friends of distribution in regard
to the question. He desired to put this bill simply
on the ground of justice, without any regard to its.
influence on the treasury, or to its influence upon
the political opinions of one party or the other. The
friends of this bill came forward advocating a meas-
ure which had received the attention of the country
for nearly twenty years, and in favor of which was
almost every western man, whatever were his politics.
He was glad to have seen his colleague [Mr. Sam-
ple] rise up and give them the views he had ad-
vanced.
Another question of great importance. The
gentleman was in favor of appropriating the
public lands to the carrying on of public works.
Upon this Mr. D. spoke only for himself. He
knew not what his colleagues or his political asso-
ciates might be disposed to do upon it. He was in
favor of making an equitable distribution, so as not
to conflict with the constitution of the country; and
he was not only willing, but heretofore, as was well
known to the gentleman and to the House, he had
used his humble efforts to obtain an appropriation
from the public lands for this purpose. This being
his view, the paramount consideration with him
was to have justice doi;e in regard to the public
lands, to the people of the West, and to the people
of the whole country; and he knew of no surer
plan of accomplishing this object, than by reducing
the prices of the lands to the actual settlers thereon.
He referred to and denied the soundness of the
argument of Mr. Collamer against this bill, from
the alleged tendency it would have to take away
from the public works the aid of the public lands*
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 14: Twenty-Eighth Congress, Second Session, legislative document, 1845; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2366/m1/38/: accessed April 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.