The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 476
xxiv, 696 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
476
CONGRESSIONAL GtdSfil.
4iana, for a grant of certain lands for the extension
of the Wabash and Erie canal to Evansville, on the
Ohio river, made a minority report.
Some conversation eiisued, in which Mr. Mo-
CLERNAND, Mr. BOYD, Mr. J. W. DAVIS,
Mr. HOUSTON, and others, took part.
Mr. HARDIN also made some observations on
the propriety of a minority of,a committee reporting
when no report had been made by the majority.
Mr. ADAMS said he had been directed by the
select committee to whom was referred the resolu-
tion of the legislature of Massachusetts, to make a
report, which was simply a resolution; (the only
one on which the committee had agreed, since the
report which was made by the late Mr. Gilmer
on the 15th day of February last,) that the amend-
ment to the constitution, proposed by the legisla-
ture of Massachusetts, ought not to be recommend-
ed. The committee had agreed that each member
should have the privilege of presenting his views
in the shape of reports of the minority; and they
asked to be discharged from^he further considera-
tion of the subject. Mr. A. (in reply to an observa-
tion of the Speaker,) said this was a case precisely
similar to that of the report now presented from a mi-
. nority of the committee on public lands. It was for
that reason that he wfshed to state to the House the
determination to which the committee had come.
They had not been able to agree upon a joint report
other than that which he had stated, viz: the reso-
lution of non-concurrence with the resolution of the
legislature of Massachusetts, which would be found
in the journal of the committee, which he had been
also instructed to report to the Honse. When the
reports of the several#™embers of the committee
were presented and received, it was his intention to
move that they be laid on the table and printed. He
was ready at any time to make his own report; and
he believed all the other members of the committtee
were also prepared, whenever the House would be
pleased to receive them.
Mr. J. W. DAVIS requested the gentleman from
Massachusetts to allow the vote to be taken upon
the report which he had made, as he understood all
objection had been withdrawn.
The SPEAKER observed that this case was
identical with that of the report offered by the gen-
tleman from Indiana, and would require the unani-
mous consent of the House.
Mr. HARDIN requested his colleague, to with-
draw his objection, and permit the report to be re-
ceived.
Mr. McCLKRNAND inquired whether the ma-
jority would be precluded, by the reception of this
report now offered, from presenting a report.
The SPEAKER replied that the majority would
not be precluded.
Mr. McCLEIlNAND then withdrew his objec-
tion, and the report was received and laid upon the
table, anil ordered to be printed.
Mr. ROBERT SMITH, from the Committee on
the Public Lands, made a report, upon the applica-
tion of Isaac Barker, for an increase of pension, ac-
companied by a bill for his relief; winch bill was
read a first and second time, ai.d committed to a
Committee of the Whole House.
Mr. A PAM.S then asked leave of the House to
make the report from the Sclect Committee; and to
present a minority report from himself and the gen-
tleman from Ohio, [Mr. Ginntyos;] and this leport,
together with those which were to be made by the
other members of the committee, he moved should
be laid on the table, and be punted.
Mr. BURT said he could not consent that this
report should be printed, unless it were first read. '
Mr. HOUSTON desired that the subject might
be allowed to pass over until to-morrow, as this was
the last day set apart for territoudl business.
Mr. ADAMS said he had no objection to the
reading of the report; but if this one were read, he
thought the House would see the propriety of hav-
ing all the others read. He had no objection that
they should be all read, and should all go to the I
country together. If there was anything so ex-
tremely detrimental in this report—if the poison of
this report was to be disseminated, the antidotes, of
which there were three or four, should go along with
the poison.
Mr. SAMPLE said he hoped the reading of these
reports would not be required, for it would occupy
the entire day to the exclusion of all other business.
Mr. WINTHROP said he understood there was a
question pending to lay the leport on the table, and
that it be printed.
- Mr. SAUNDERS called for a division of the
question.
Mr. ADAMS said his motion to lay on the table
and print, he intended should apply to all the reports
which were to be made by the members of the com-
mittee.
The SPEAKER observed that no proposition to
print ^could be entertained in reference to reports
which were not now pending before the House.
Mr. WELLER suggested that the motion to print
should be postponed.
The question was then put upon laying the report
on the table, and carried.
Messrs. JOS. R. INGERSOLL, (on behalf of
himself and Mr. Garrett Davis,) ETJRKE, SAM-
PLE, and MORSE, then asked and obtained leave
severally to make minority reports.
Mr. HOPKINS made the same motion in refer-
ence to these reports as had been in reference to
the first—that they should be laid on the table, and
that the question of printing should go over until
to-morrow.
Mr. DROMGOOLE inquired what disposition
had been made of the report of the majority.
The SPEAKER replied that there had been no
disposition whatever made of it. The question was
now upon the motion to print.
Mr. DROMGOOLE said his inquiry was wheth-
er the report of the majority (being the request to be
discharged from the further consideration of the sub-
ject) was included in the motion of the gentleman
from Massachusetts to lay on the table.
Mr. ADAMS observed that it was not his in-
tention to include that repdrt.
Mr. DROMGOOLE understood that the report
did not include the report of the majority of the
committee. If the majority of the committee had
reported any resolutions, he presumed they stood
before the House for action.
Some conversation took place between the
CHAIR and Messrs. DROMGOOLE, BURKE,
ADAMS, THOMPSON, and SUMMERS, in re-
lation to the report of the committee; when
Mr. ADAMS stated that he had informed the
House that the majority of the committee had agreed
011 three resolutions—1st, That the amendment of
the constitution proposed by the legislature of Mass-
achusetts ought not to be recommended by the
House; 2d, that the committee be discharged from
the further consideration of the subject; and, 3d, that
the journal of the proceedings of the committee be
reported to the House.
Some remarks on a point of order were made by
Messrs. GIDDINGS, CAMPBELL, ADAMS, and
CHAPMAN; when
The SPEAKER stated that the question would
first be put on laying on the table the several reports
of the individual members of the committee; second,
on printing such reports; and, thirdly, on agreeing
to the resolutions reported by the majority of the
committee.
The question was then put on laying the reports
on the table, and carried.
The question of printing the reports was then
postponed till to-morrow; and
The question coming up on agreeing to the resolu-
tions of the majority of tne committee,
Mr. CHAPMAN called for the previous qucs-
tioiTT" which was seconded, and the mam question
ordered.
Mr. R1IETT called for a division of the ques-
tion, so as to take it on the three resolutions sep-
arately.
Mr. CAMPBELL called for the yeas and nays;
which were ordered.
Mr. WINTHROP moved that the journal of the
committee be read ; but the motion was not agreed
to.
The main Question was then put on agreeing to
the first resolution of the majority of the committee,
as follows:
Rtsvh >'d. *That the amendment of the constitution, pro-
posed by the le^islaiuie of Massachusetts, ought not to be
recommended by the House.
This question was decided in the affirmative—
yeas 156, nays 13, as follows:
YEAS—Messrs Atkinson, Barrm^er, Barnard, Bidlack.
James Black. Jame^ A. Black, Elackwell, Bower, Bow-
lin, Boyd, Bren^lc, Jacob Erinkerhoft' Brodhead, Milton
Brown, "William J. Brown, Buftington, Burke, Burt,
Campbell, Gary, Carroll, Catlin, Causm, Reuben Chap-
man, Augustus A. t hapman, Chappell, Chilton, Clinch,
Clingman, Cobb, Coles, Collamer, Cranston, Cross, Cul-
lom, Dana, Darnel, Garrett Davis. Richard D. Davis,
W. Davis, Dean, Deberry, Dellet, Dickinson, Drom-
goolc, Dunlap, Elmer, Farlee" Ficklm, Foster, French,
Willis Greco, Byram Green, Grider, Hale, Hamlin, Ham-
mett, Haralson, Hardin, Harper, Hays, Henley, Herrick,
Holmes, Hoge, Hopkins, Houston, Hubard, Hubbell,
Hughes, Washington Hunt, James B. Hunt, Charles J.
Ingersoll, Joseph R. Ingersoll, Irvin, Jameson, Cave
Johnson, Perley B. .Johnson, Andrew Johnson, George •-
W. Jones, Andrew Kennedy, John P. Kennedy, Preston
King, Kirkpatrtck, Labranche, Leonard, Lewis, Lucas,
Lumpkin, McCauslen, Maclay, McClelland, McCJernand,
McConnell, McDowell, Mcllvaine, Edward J. Morris, a
Moseley, Newton, Norris, Owen, Parmenter, Payne, Pet-
tit, Peyton, Elisha K. Potter, Emery D. Potter, Pratt,
Purdy, Rathbun, Charles M. Reed, David S. Reid, Reding,
Relfe, Rhett, Roberts, Robinson, Rodney, St. John, Sam-
ple, Saunders, Schenck, Senter, Thomas H. Seymour, Da-
rid L. Seymour, Simons. Slidell, Thomas Smith, Caleb
B. Smith, Robert Smith, Spence, Steenrod, Stetson, John
Stewart, Stiles, Strong, Summers, Taylor, Thomasson,
Thompson, Tibbatts, Tucker, Tyler, Vance, Vanmeter,
Vinton, Weller, Wentworth, Wethered, Wheaton, White,
Williams, Woodward, William Wright, and Joseph A.
Wright—156.
NAYS—Messrs. Abbot, Adams. Baker, Darrah, Dickey,
Giddings, Hudson, Marsh, Morse, Rockwell, Rogers,
Severance, and Winthrop-—13.
The question being taken on agreeing to the se-
cond resolution, it was decided in the affirmative,
without a division—the yeas and nays being dis-
pensed with by general consent.
No question on the third resolution was taken,
(i. e. in relation to the journal of the committee,)
Mr. ADAMS stating that he supposed the House
could not now act on that question.
WESTERN RESERVED MINERAL LANDS.
The SPEAKER announced the next business in
order to be the bill (yesterday postponed to this
day) directing the President of the United States to
cause the reserved lead mines in the States of Illi-
nois and Missouri, and Territories of Iowa and
Wisconsin, to be sold, on which Mr. Hoge had the
floor.
Mr. HOUSTON appealed to the gentleman from
Illinois to yield the floor, so that he could move that
the House resolve itself into Committee of the
Whole on the territorial business, this being the
last day allotted to that business.
Some conversation ensued on the question of Mr.
Hoge's retention of the floor hereafter on this bill,
whenever it should come up, which ended in Mr.
Hoge's expressing his desire to proceed at once.
Mr. HOGE then commenced his remarks by re-
capitulating the positions and observations of gen-
tlemen who had preceded him on this bill; and next
took a review of the legislation of this government
from a very early period in relation to these re-
served lands; ana, at his request, the Clerk read a
report heretofore made on this subject.
He believed there was no difference of opinion
among gentlemen here as to the propriety of selling
these lands, nor was there any difference of opin-
ion in any of the various branches of the govern-
ment. The measure had always been recommend-
ed, from the year 1829 down to this time. Why
was it now resisted: Because the imagination of
the gentleman from Tennessee conceived that the
government was about to throw away an immense
amount of wealth. The gentleman's object was
not to let the lands be sold for a reasonable consld-
eration, but to let the government speculate out of
its own citizens. He seemed desirous of drawing
a distinction between these lands and the other
lands of the government, and to compel purchasers
to pay five, ten, fifteen, up to a hundred dollars an
acre, upon the ground of their superior value. The
gentleman had formed a totally erroneous opinion.
Mr. H. said that it was not a question of dollars
and cents, but of population, and of the advance-
ment of that beautiful country; and every principle
of policy of expediency, and of justice, called
upon government to permit Illinois, Wisconsin,
and Iowa to dispose of these lands in the same
manner that they had done in other States. The
gentleman from Tennessee said that the mineral
lands of the United States had always been re-
served from sale, and that the government had
never disposed of them in the ordinary way. Did
he forget that the mineral lands in Missouri had
been sold at public auction? Did he forget that the
salines had been donated by Congress to several of
the States? Why, then, should there be a distinc-
tion made between Missouri and Illinois, Iowa and
Wisconsin? All we ask (said Mr. H.) is uniformi-
ty in the disposition of these lands, and that no dif-
ference should be made to the injury of Illinois,
Iowa, and Wisconsin?
Mr. C. JOHNSON desired to say a word or two
before the closing of the debate. It seemed, from
the course that had been taken in this bill, that if
any member objected to the mode of doing business
in the House, or to the detail's of a particular bill, he
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book 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 Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2367/m1/500/: accessed May 8, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.