The Congressional Globe, Volume 14: Twenty-Eighth Congress, Second Session Page: 40

                                
40
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
28th Cong 2d Sess.
The Public Land Bill—Mr. Mc Clernand.
Pea. 1844.
H. of Reps,
one assigned was the-extension of the area of popu-
lation; the enlargement of the Union by the addition
of new States, arid the avoiding of collisions with
foreign sovereignties erected on contiguous territory.
Assuming, then, this view of the subject to be cqi-
rect, how now are the public lands to be adminis-
tered, in order to the attainment of the great object
for which" they were acquired? Can it be attained
by "merely setting a price on them? If so, the
task may be easily accomplished. It may
be as well performed by setting, such a price as
will prevent their sale, as one which will insure it;
by offering them in quantities corresponding to the
size of counties, as in 40-acre tracts. No; this is
not the course to fulfil the solemn engagements of
the government; but the true mode is to reduce the
price of the lands to the ability of the settler to
buy. By this policy you not only effect the settle-
ment of the lands, but alse'incidentally force the sale
of large quantities of the best lands, at fair prices,
now held up by monopolies for speculation, much
to the injury of the country; whilst another effect
would be to fill up our scattered settlements, strength-
en our frontiers, and thereby lessen the expense of
the military establishments kept up for their protec-
tion.
Asa measure tending to reduce the patronage and
expenditures of the government, it is entitled to sup-
pose. There is no other branch of the public ser-
vice so prolific of these consequences as the admin-
istration of the public lands; and none more impe-
riously demands reformation and retrenchment.
There are now spread over the new States and
Territories sixty-six land offices, one hundred and
thirty-two registers and receivers of the public
lands, eight surveyors general, with a host of depu-
ties, clerics, draftsmen, chain-carriers, and axe-men,
supported at an annual expense of about $500,000.
These officers, from the nature of their functions,
are brought in contact with large masses of people
in the new States, in reference to interests immedi-
ately affecting the security of their homes and fire-
sides. From this cause, and the further fact that
they possess an intimate knowledge of all that re-
lates to the public lands, their favor and information
are considerations of great moment to both settlers
and speculators; and, therefore, they have it in their
power to exert an undue influence over the opinions
and actions of these classes. The passage of the
bill, by hastening the sale of the public lands, will,
in a few years, cut off, or, at all events, materially
reduce, this branch of patronage, and relieve the
new States from its baneful influence. Such a re-
sult certainly would be desirable; and if we are to
believe the daily denunciations hurled against exec-
utive patronage, and the apprehensions expressed of
its ultimate triumph over liberty, it is indispensable
to the safety of the country. It is a fact which
will hardly be denied, that few, if any, other govern-
ments known to history, have made such rapid ac-
quisitions of patronage and power as this. Its ex-
perience has totally deceived the expectations, of
many of the most conspicuous actors in the work
of its creation, who expressed the fear that it would
be too inefficient to answer the purposes for which
it was instituted. Contrary to their expectations, a
splendor and attraction surround it, which
eclipse the smaller lights of the States, and draw
from them the homage due a sovereign. Its more
conspicuous offices and higher rewards congregate
around it the best talents of the country to sus-
tain its encroachments, and a host of expectants, ul-
. ways ready to bow to its mandates, as the road to
favor and preferment. Its civil and military depart-
ments now muster an official corps of some hun-
dreds of thousands—fed and clothed out of the treas-
ury—quartered among the States as a military
body—dependent upon executive favor for continu-
ance in office, and subject to the will of a common
head—the one-m<m power. The danger of such an
influence extended throughout the Union, and con-
centred in one man, is too obvious fer commentary.
It is enough to say that it is on the increase; and that,
in a critical moment, it might prove fatal to libei ty.
The passage of the bill would reach and materially
reform the evil. It would simplify the machinery
of the government—tend to restrain its action with-
in safe limits—withdraw an angry and expensive
subject oflegislation from the halls of Congress, and
essentially relieve the States from their pecuniary
embarrassments, by accelerating settlements, and the
period when all the wasteland within their limits
will be liable to taxation. Many of the most emi-
nent statesmen produced by the country have con-
sidered the administration of the public lands one of
the most dangerous powers vested in the federal
government.
Mr. John Randolph, of Virginia, in 1826, in re-
ply to General Harrison in the Senate of the United
States, said:
"I wish that every new State had all the lands within the
State, that, in the shape of receiverships and other ways,
these States might not be brought under the influence of
this ten miles square. In other words, I wish that all the
patronage of the land office was in the hands of the individ-
ual States, and not in the hands of the general government.
1 am the friend of State rights, and will cut down the pa-
ti onage of this gr neral government, which has increased, is
increasing, and must he diminished; or we, the States, shall
he not only 'shorn of out beams,' sir, but 'abolished quite.' "
Mr. Van Buren expressed himself as follows in
the same place and year:
"The subject of the public lands was becoming daily
more and more interesting, and would occupy much time
in legislation. It extended the patronage of the govern-
ment over these States to a great extent; it subjected the
States in which those lands were situated to an unwise and
unprofitable dependence on the federal government. Mr.
Van Buren said he should vote for every call on that sub-
ject to enable those at some future day to act understand-
ingly on it. No man could render the country a greater
service than he who should devise some plan by which the
United States might be relieved from the ownership of
this property by some equitable mode. He would vote for
a proposition to vest the lands in the States in which they
stood on some just and equitable terms, as related to the
other States of the confederacy. He hoped that, after hav-
ing full information oil the subject, they would be able to
eflect that great object. He believed that if those lands
were disposed of at once to theseveralStates.it would be
satisfactory to all."
Mr. Tazewell, of Virginia," in 1828, said, in the
same place:
"That he was pleased with the plan of the gentleman
from Missouri, [Mr. Benton;] but lie thought it ought to
extend farther. He would wish to have the arrangement
something like this: while the lands are at the highest min-
imum, one dollar, allow the actual settlers to have the pre-
emption right at seventy-five cents; when they are at sev-
ety iivc cents, allow actual settlers to enter them at fifty
cents; and so on, down to the lowest This, he thought,
would be productive of a good eflect, as it would be a con-
tinued encouragement to actual settlers, and give them an
advantage overother purchasers."
These were the enlarged and enlightened views
entertained by Randolph, Van Buren, and Tazewell,
men whose names were ranked among the proudest
ornaments of the civil history of the country—men
whose eminent talents had adorned these halls, and
whose patriotic examples are worthy of imitation
and praise.
Mr McC. called on the House, and particularly
the gentlemen from Virginia and New York, to
carry out the enlightened policy which had been
recommended by these distinguished statesmen.
Having said this much on the question imme-
diately under consideration, it was proper (said Mr.
McC.) to pay a passing notice to an antagonist
measure, the distribution of the proceeds of the
sales of the lands among the States, which was the
latent cause of much of the opposition to the present
bill. Distribution contemplates the continuance of
the present land system until all of the public lands
are disposed of; without the one, the other would
be nugatory. And what has been the immediate
operation of the present system on the new States?
Among other evils which have flowed from it, it
has operated powerfully to retard the progress of
their population, and the general improvement of
their condition. More than a hundred millions of
dollars have been drawn from them as the price of
settlements and homes, which otherwise might
have been applied to building towns and cities,
making farms, opening canals, and constructing iron
highways for the general profit and convenience.
It can hardly be doubted that the population of the
West would be double what it is now, but for
this continual and remorseless drain upon the
slow accumulations of industry and economy. Nor
that, if the millions which have been thus extorted
were at the disposal of these States, they would now
be abundantly able to pay all of their obligations.
Oppressive as it has been on communities, it is even
more unjust to individuals. Take the case of the
pioneer, for example. He leaves the home of his
fathers, and all of its tender endearments, and goes
forth into the rude forests of the West. There he
finds the lands of his government, wild and valueless;
to secure a home and subsistance for himself and
and family, he builds a log-cabin—opens a field and
cultivates it in the lonely independence of a hardy
adventurer. The way is made clear for others who
come after him—the foundation of a new empire is
laid; and after all this, the speculator comes and
forces him to choose between being driven from his
humble home, and paying his government for his
own labor. This is all wrong; the gross injustice
of such a policy is almost enough to stir th® latent
fires of rebellion. - ^
Distribution would not only perpetuate the pres-
ent land system, but would materially aggravate its
evils. It would array all of the old States against
any modification of its provisions, which wo^ld have
the effect to reduce their dividends of the land pro-
ceeds. It would create an antagonism of interest
between the old and sew States, and thus generate
a spirit of selfish strife where good-will and disin-
terested patriotism should prevail. The pre-emp-
tion policy having the effect to defer the salts of a
portion of the lands for the benefit of the settler,
would be abolished as an obstacle to the monopoly
of the lands by the speculator, and the speedy grati-
fication of the whetted appetites of the old States for
the expected spoil.
An effort is made to sustain the policy of distribu-
tion on the ground that it would supply the States
with a gratuity whereby they would be enabled to
improve their financial conditions. But it cannot
have this effect. The very nature of the case for-
bids it. The government, it is well known, derives
its existence from the people and the States. It is a
mendicant on their bounty, and lives by their con-
tributions. Is it possible, therefore, for it to give
anything to the .people but what it first draws from
them? Certainly not. In one view, however, it
may be said that it would divert a small sum from
the general charges of the Union to those of the
States; but yet the same sum (and, in fact, a much
larger one) would have to be raised by additional
taxation, to supply the deficiency thas created.
Suppose, for example, the expenditures of the gov-
ernment to be $20,000,000 a year," and the amount
of its revenues, including the land sales, to be the
same: it is evident if $2,000,000, the annual amount
of such sales, be distributed among the States,- that
the deficiency created must be supplied by imposing
a tax equal to that amount, and the cost of assessing,
collecting, and paying the same over, or an increased
tariff upon imports, attended with the double effect of
enhancing theprices of domestic and foreign manufac-
tures to the consumers of the country; which would
be equivalent to the imposition of a tax of about
$8,000,000 or $10,000,000, to make good an ori-
final deficiency of $2,000,000. By such a process the
tates would be soon beggared rather than enriched.
It is a species of political legerdemain, the mysterious
virtues of which cannot be so well appreciated by
the honest, unassuming democracy, as by their more
astute rivals, the federalists. It is, however, in this
aspact that "distribution" may be considered the
entering wedge of a prohibitory tariff; and therefore
the tenacity of the federal party to saddle it on the
country. Distribution is also identical with the
new federal scheme of the "assumption of the State
debts by the general government." It rests on the
same principle, is supported by the same argu-
ments, and looks to the same objects. Under both,
the revenues of the government are diverted from
their constitutional purposes, and the States are
made their recipients. The only difference between
them is, that in one case the general government be-
comes the direct paymaster of the debts of the
States; whilst m the other, the money is paid over
by the government to the States for the same pur-
pose. Distribution, therefore, is "assumption." It
is the jackall sent forward to herald the advent and
perpetuate the oppressions of a high tariff and pro-
tective duties, and the lever by which the crushing
weightof assumption is to be foisted on the country,
and the way made clear for its iron car. Let the
baneful principle of distribution be but once firmly
ingrafted on the settled policy of the government,
and the effect will be to transform it into a land-
jobber; the tariff taxes will be raised, not for
the legitimate objects of the government, but that
more lands may be bought for the purposes
of distribution. The cry m one section of the
Union will be high taxes, high prices, more lands,
and more distribution; and m the other, low taxes,
low prices, no lands, and no distribution; until, in the
course of time and events, the Union may be shaken
if not dissolved by the contest. No, we want no
distribution ; we are not to be seduced by its har-
lot's attire ; the treacherous overtures which would
vouchsafe its amorous rites, we respectfully decline.
We will be content with the humbler boon of "re-
duction and graduation." This is all we ask; and
we want this not only for the reasons assigned, but
also because the operation of the measure in accel-
erating the sale and settlement of the public lands, will
contribute to establish the new States on the same
grounds of "sovereignty, freedom, and independ-