The Congressional Globe, Volume 14: Twenty-Eighth Congress, Second Session Page: 53
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:
Jan. 1840.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
28th Cong 2d Sess.
The Public Land Bill—Mr. T. Smith.
H. of Reps.
at the present prices of agricultural products. Mr.
C. said it was impossible to estimate the amount of
useful labor that had been lost to the country by
keeping the price of the refused lands beyond their
actual value. Thousands settle upon these lands;
but they make no more improvement than they are
compelled to do, to live and raise provisions for
their families. They are not only discouraged from
making improvements by their not owning the
tend, but they well know that, although they found
the land when they settled upon it almost destitute
of value, if they add to its value by material im-
Erovements, some hawk-eyed speculator would soon
uy the land and appropriate it to his own use.
Thus, for three-fourths of the year, while they are
not cultivating their crop, these settlers are idle;
while, if the land belonged to them, they would go
on to improve it, and add to its value. This loss of
the productive labor of the country is worthy of the
consideration of all statesmen.
The gentleman from Ohio objected to this bill be-
cause it proposes to reduce the |price of lands when
they are now too cheap. He insists that the cheap
price at which the government sells its lands, is the
cause of the low price of provisions—that we pro-
duce too much, &c. Now that gentleman, being an
advocate of the protective policy, ought not to com-
plain of the abundance and cheapness of provisions,
while the manufactured goods keep up high, as they
are comparatively now.
Mr. C. said he had always thought that an abun-
dance of provisions was a national blessing; it cer-
tainly was advantageous to the manufacturing
classes. If that gentleman will examine the subject,
he will find that it is not because government
land sells cheap that agricultural products are low,
but that it is owing to the operation of the protective
tariff policy which he advocates, whereby our for-
eign trade is crigpled, and we are compelled to sub-
mit to the tera^i of the home purchasers without
competition.
Mr. C. said he thought those who advocate pro-
tection to manufactures argued that it tended to ad-
vance the price of agricultural products by increasing
the demand; but, although they have protection now
to their heart's content, they find provisions loio; and
the gentleman from Ohio advises as the remedy to
raise the price of tile pubtic lands.
Besides, the protective policy, its friends say,
will cause laborers to abandon agriculture and go
into manufactories. The gentleman from Ohio,"as
another incentive, would raise the price of the pub-
liclands—diivefrom their employment men in who.-c
bosoms the love of agricultural scenes and employ-
ments was implanted by the hand of nature herself—
to forsake their forms and go into the confined and
unhealthy factories! In the name of God, were not
these gentlemen satisfied with having a system of
duties operating as bounties to the tune of forty, fif-
ty, and even two hundred per cent, on the necessa-
ries of life, without adopting other oppressive means
of driving our people into manufactories? He did
not believe the people of the great western State of
Ohio would sustain their representatives in such doc-
trines.
Mr. C. said his time would notpermithim to notice
all the objections to this bill, but he could not omit
one argument of the gentleman from Vermont. Mr.
C. understood him to say that, as by the great sales
of the public land in 1835 and 1836, much remained
in the hands of individuals, (speculators,) the pass-
age of this bill might materially injure these land-
holders by limiting their sales. This, Mr. C. thought
was a very good argument for the bill. Mr. C. went
for precisely that result.
Let the government reduce the price of lands so
that the money received for lands may go into the
treasury, rather than in the pockets of speculators.
Mr. C. did not care how much speculators lost: he
meant to save the people—the actual cultivators of the
soil. But Mr. C. said that an argument used by the
gentleman from Maryland against this measure was,
in his estimation, so novel, that it required a pass-
ing notice. Mr. C. understood him to contend that
the price of lands ought not to be reduced in the
new States, lest it might encourage emigration from
the old.
[Mr. Capsin explained. He only intended to
say that it would give too strong a stimulus to emi-
gration, already too rapid for the emigrants, as well
as the interest of the States.]
Mr. Chapman resumed. Certainly he understood
the gentleman as maintaining that the bill would in-
duce emigration from the old to the new States.
Mr. C. proceeded to inquire whether this would
be sound policy if practised in domestic life. W ould it
do for the head of a family in this country, where we
are in need of an increase of population, to say that
none of his sons or daughters should marry and go
off, lest his own family should decrease in number?
Mr. C. would have been greatly surprised had such
an argument fallen from the mouth of a married
man; but his surprise was still greater at hearing
it from a bachelor. He trusted that if the
gentleman from Maryland should ever be for-
tunate enough to have a family, he would not estab-
lish in domestic life a rule so cruel and tyrannical.
Mr. C. said such was not the policy of our fore-
fathers, eit&er in private or political life. Mr. C.
said the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Causin]
had told the committee that much had been done by
this government for the new States. Now, in the
name of Heaven, he wanted to know what had
been done for them? He wanted to know how
much of some forty millions of dollars, annually
collected by means of the present unjust and oppres-
sive tariff, was expended in his State? What share
of the public offices did Alabama get? He would
call the attention of the committee and the whole
country to a comparative statement he had prepared
of the distribution of the federal offices among the
several States—showing the number each State was
entitled to according to population—the number
they had more and less than they are entitled to.
How is the comparison between the States of Mary-
land and Alabama in this respect? It will be seen
that while Maryland had, of the federal offices,
three hundred and ninety-three more than she is en-
titled to, Alabama has one hundred and eighty-
eight less. No State or Territory in the Union had
so small a share as Alabama. She had not a single
citizen in office at this great metropolis of office-
holders and office-seekers.
She stood in this respect in a -condition enviably
independent. Mr. C. said he felt proud that he
hailed from such a State—the banner State in our
late democratic victory, and Mr. C.'s the banner
democratic district in the State—the district that had
given a greater democratic majority than all the oth-
ers in the State together.
Mr. C. said that his State had stood from
the beginning, and would continue to stand, firmly
upon her democratic principles. Nothing can drive
her from them. Although groaning under a heavy
debt, and her citizens borne down by heavy taxes
in times of pecuniary hardship on account of the
low price of her staples, she has proudly refused any
share in the government distribution of land or mon-
ey. She touched not, tasted not, handled not the
unclean thing. She begged for no bounties, for no
largesses, either in offices or money; and still she has
proudly maintained her faith. Her fair escutcheon
remains to this hour untarnished by a stain, and he
trusted in God it ever would.
SPEECH OF MR. THOMAS SMITH,
OF INDIANA.
In the House of Representatives, January 2, 1845—
In Committee of the Whole, on the bill to re-
duce and graduate the price of the public lands.
Mr. THOMAS SMITH rose and said:
Mr. Chairman: When I moved, on the other
day, that the committee rise, it was not for the pur-
pose of entitling myself to the floor to make a speech.
It was simply for the purpose of going back into the
House, with a view to an adjournment, that time of
day having arrived. But, Mr. Chairman, since
that time, upon reflection, and in view of the impor-
tance of the question involved, and being a western
man, in part representing an interest that may be
supposed to be vitally interested in every thing re-
lating to our land system, and being entitled to the
floor by the rules and courtesy of the committee, I
hope for the indulgence of the committee for a short
time, in submitting a few very desultory and undi-
gested thoughts on the bill now under considera-
tion.
Mr. Chairman, a man may talk about arty thing;
but to talk intelligibly upon a subject, that subject
must be understood. Then, sir, let us examine
the first section of this bill, which is in these
words:
"Be it enacted, That all of the lands of the United
States whjch shall have been subject to entry lor five years,
or upwards, prior to the passage of this act, or prior to the
time an application may be made to enter the same
under the provisions of this act, and still remaining un-
sold, may be entered for settlement or cultivation, or for
the use 01 an adjacent farm or plantation, at the price of
one dollar per acre for any quantity not exceeding three
hundred acres."
The provisions of this section apply to all the
grades of the bill. Then,' sir, if I construe this bilL
right—and to my remarks on this point I call the
honorable mover's [Mr. Houston] attention—all tha
public land must come into market under the exist-
ing laws, and remain in market five years, subject
to entry at the price of $1 25 per acre; from five
years to ten they may be taken at §1;* from ten to
fifteen years at 75 cents; from fifteen to twenty years
at 50 cents per acre; and after they have been ex-
posed to sale, and have remained in the market
twenty years and upwards, they may be taken, for
purposes of actual settlement, (that purpose being ex-
pressed, as the law requires, on oath,) at the price
of 25 cents per acre. They may be entered for the
use of an adjacent farm or plantation, as for actual
settlement. This last clause I would prefer to see
amended so that those making an entry appendant,
should be actual settlers, at the time, oil the land to
which they would add adjacent land. This would
cut off all prospect of speculation in those refuse
lands.
Sir, if I have not misconceived the provisions of
this bill, I have stated its principal features correct-
ly. I am in favor of the principle and the policy of-
graduating the price of the public lands. It is a
principle of equity and justice; it should have been
impressed upon our land system at the beginning;
but it is better now than never, though it may pro-
duce a very considerable change in our land system. -
Allow me here, sir, to notice the proposition of-
fered by the honorable member from Kentucky,
[Mr. Tiiomasson,] as an amendment or substitute
for the bill under consideration. That proposition
is to give to certain individuals—all persons is the ex-
pression—certain quantities of land, in fee, upon
proof of actual settlement, &c. Let me assure the
honorable mover that I am in favor of the principle
of his amendment, and should like to see it engraft-
ed upon this bill as an amendment properly prepar-
ed and qualified; but 1 do hope it will not be admit-
ted by way of rider, or substitute for the bill. I
will not do the gentleman the injustice of impugning
his motives in bringing forward this amendment at
this time, believing him sincere in it, and also in fa-
vor of graduation; but the quarter from which it
comes is a little liable to suspicion. This doctrine
of graduating the price of the public lands has al-
ways been tinctured with party politics; and
so kind a proposition, coming from the wrong
side of the house, subjects it to a well-grounded
suspicion that it is an opposition move, and at this
time should not be entertained by the friends of
graduation.
Sir, it appears to me the gentleman has not well
considered his substitute. Its language is, any or
all persons, &c. This includes the black as well as
the white man. I have no idea the mover intends
by this bill to make provision for those who, in the
slave States, may see proper to turn loose their
slaves, that they should be allowed to take land un-
der the provisions of this bill. I have no objection
to the principle that the government should give to
the destitute a portion of the public lands: to it I
have no objection whatever. I believe, rightfully,
the public domain belongs to the cultivator of the
soil—to those noble spirits who go forward into the
wilderness, subdue its wildness, and transform it in-
to a fruitful field. The government may well pro-
vide for all such who are destitute of land: to furnish
them with a spot of earth would more promote the
strength and prosperity of the nation than any other
act that Congress could do. In my opinion, it
would be an act of pure justice and sound policy.
The compensation would be found in the impetus
that it would give to industry and enterprise, and in
the increased love and attachment of the people to
their government and their country.
But, sir, as I desire to be as brief as possible, I
will proceed at once to consider the two prominent
objections which have been urged against it. It hag
been asserted, on the other side of the Hause, that
the adoption of this measure would have the ten-
dency to reduce the revenue derivable from the salt
of the public lands; and that its benefits would resul-
to the speculators. These are the two prominent ob-
jections that I have heard urged' Some others
however, of less importance, I will try to notice be-
fore I sit down. Let it be remembered, sir, that
this bill is not introduced as a measure of finance; if
it was, there would be some plausibility in the ob-
jection; but even then, its truth would admit of mud'
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/m1/477/: accessed April 26, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.