0? W A N K E L E S T E R ,2 0N THE MUEIECT (H.~" WW @ $ ~ DELIVIZIITFJTE 'I‘HE SENATE OF "[“HI5.‘; UNITED STATES, ..Mm.uuw' 520., 181W. ‘WA 91-! EN GTON 3': wmmmun mt cuww £9’ Mimwwm; R830. SPEECH. THE following resolution, moved by Mr. Four, of Con- necticut, being under consideration : “Resolved, That the Committee on Public Lands be instructed to inquire and report the quan- tity of the publielands remaining unsold within each State and Territory, and whether it be expedient to limit, for a ‘certain period, the sales of the Public Lands to such Lands only as have heretofore been offered for sale, and are now subject to entry at the minimum price. And, also, whether the ofiiee of Surveyor General, and some of the Land Offices, may not be abolish-v ed without detriment to the public interest; or whether it be expedient to adopt measures to hasten the sales, and extend more rapidly the surveys of the Public Lands.” Mr. Wnnsurun, of Massachusetts, said, on rising, that nothing had been further from his intention, than to take any part in the discussion of this resolution. It proposed only an inquiry on a subject of much importance, and one in re- gard to which it might strike the mind of the mover, and of’ other gentlemen, that inquiry and investigation would be use- ful. Although, said Mr. W., I am one of those who do not perceive any particular utility in instituting the inquiry, I have, nevertheless, not seen that harm would be likely to re- sult from adopting the resolution. Indeed, -it «gives no new powers, and hardly imposes any new duty on the committee. All that the resolution proposes should he done, the committee is quite competent, without the resolution, to do by virtue of its ordinary powers. But, sir, although 1 have felt quite in- different about the passing of the resolution, yet opinions were expressed, yesterday, on the general subject of the public lands, and on some other subjects, by the gentleman from South Carolina, so widely diflerent from my own, that I am not willing to let the occasion pass without some reply. If I deemed the resolution, as originally proposed, hardly neces- sary, still less do I think it either necessary or expedient to adopt it, i“ since a second branch has been added to it to-day. By this second branch, the committee is to be instructed to ell: inquire whether it he expedient to adopt measures to hasten the sales, and extend more rapidly the surveys of the public lands. Now, it appears, that, in forty years, Mr. ‘President, we have sold no more than about twenty millions of acres of pub- lic lands. The annual sales do not now exceed, and never have exceeded, one million of acres. A million a year is, ac» cording to our experience, as much, as the increase of popula- tion can bring into settlement. And, it appears, also, that we have, at this moment, sir, surveyed and in the market, ready for sale, two hundred and ten millions of acres, or thereahoutsu All this vast mass, at this moment, lies on our hands, for more want of purchasers. Can any man, looking to the real interests of the country and the People, seriously think of in- quiring whether we ought not still faster to hasten the public surveys, and to bring, still more and more rapidly, other vast quantities into the market? The truth is, that rapidly as population has increased, the surveys have, nevertheless, out- run our wants. There are more lands than purchasers. They are now sold at low prices, and taken up as fast as the in» crease of people furnishes hands to take them up. It is ob»- vious, that no artificial regulation, no forcing of sales, no giving away of the lands even, can produce any great and sudden augmentation of population. The ratio of increase, though great, has yet its bounds. Hands for labor are mul»-l tiplied only at a certain rate. The lands cannot he settled but by settlers; nor faster than settlers can he found. A sys- tem, if new adopted, of forcing sales, at whatever prices, may have theielfect of throwing large quantities into the hands of individuals, who, would, in thisway, in time, become them» selves competitorrs with the Government, in the sale of land. My own opinion has uniformly been, that the public lands should be oifered freely, and at low prices; so as to encourage settlement and cultivation as rapidly as the ‘increasing popu- lation of the country is eompetenrt to. extend settlement and cultivation. ' 5 Every actual settler should be able to buy good land, at a cheap rate; but, on the other hand, speculation, by individuals, on a large scale, should not be encouraged, nor should the value of all lands, sold and unsold, be reduced to nothing, by throwing new and vast quantities into the market, at prices merely nominal. I now proceed, sir, to some of the opinions expressed by the gentleman from South Carolina. Two or three topics were touched by him, in regard to which he expressed sen- timents in which I do not at all concur. In the first place, sir, the honorable gentleman spoke of the whole course and policy of the Government towards those who have purchased and settled the public lands, and seemed to think this policy wrong. He held it to have been, from the first, hard and rigorous: he was of opinion, that the Unit»- ed States had acted towards those who had subdued the west— ern wilderness, in the spirit of a step-mother : that the public domain had been improperly regarded as a source of revenue; and that we had rigidly compelled payment for that which ought to have been given away. He said we ought to have followed the analogy of’ other Governments, which had acted on a much more liberal system than ours, in planting colonies. He dwelt, particularly, upon the settlement of America by colonists from Europe; and reminded us, that their Govern- ments had not exacted from those colonists payment for the soil: with them, he said, it had been thought, that the con- quest of the wilderness was, itself, an equivalent for the soil, A and he lamented that we had not followed that example, and pursued the same liberal course towards our own emigrants to the West. Now, sir, Ideny, altogether, that there has been any thing harsh or severe in the policy of the Government towards the new States of the West. On the contrary, I maintain, that it has uniformly pursued, towards those States, a liberal and 6 enlightened system, such as its own duty allowed and re- quired, and such as their interests and welfare demanded. The Government has been no step-mother to the new States. She has not been careless of their interests, nor deaf to their requests; but from the first moment, when the Territories which now form those States were ceded to the Union, down to the time in which I am now speaking, it has been the in- variable object of the.Government to dispose of the soil ac- cording to the true spirit of the obligation under which it received it‘; to hasten its settlement and cultivation, as far and "r as fast as practicable ; and to rear the new communities into equal and independent States, at the earliest moment of their being able, by their numbers, to form a regular Government. I do not admit, sir, that the analogy to which the gentleman refers us, is just, or that the cases are at all similar. There is no resemblance between the cases upon which a statesman can found an argument. The original North American Colo.- nists either fled from Europe, like our New England ancestors, to avoid persecution, or came hither at their own charges, and often at the ruin of their fortunes, as private adventurers. Gre- nerally speaking, they derived neither succour nor protection from their Governments at home. Wide, indeed, is the differ- ence between those cases and ours. From the very origin of the Government, these western lands, and the just protection of those who had settled, or should settle on them, have been leading objects in our policy, and have caused expenditures, both of blood and treasure, not inconsiderable; not, indeed, a exceeding the importance of the object, and not yielded grudg- ingly or reluctantly, certainly"; but yet not inconsiderable, though necessary sacrifices, made for high proper ends. The Indian title has been extinguished at the expense of many mil- lions. Is that nothing ? There is still a much more material consideration. iThese colonists, if we are to call them so, in passingthe Allegany, did not pass beyond the care and pro- tection of their own Government. Wherever they went, the public arm was still stretched over them. A t parental Go~ 7 vernment at home was ever mindful of their condition, and their wants; and nothing was spared, which a just sense of their necessities required. Is‘ it forgotten, that it was one of the most arduous duties of the Government, in its earliest years, to defend the frontiers against the northwestern Indians ? Are the sufferings and misfortunes under Harmar and St. Clair not worthy to be remembered? Do the occurrences connected with these military efforts show an unfeeling neglect of west-— ern interests ? And here, sir, what becomes of the gentleman’s analogy ? What English armies accompanied our ancestors to clear the forest of a barbarous foe? What treasures of the Ex- chequer were expended in buying up the original title to the soil P What governmental arm held its ]Egis over our fathers’ heads, as they pioneered their way in the wilderness ? Sir, it was not till General Wayne’s victory, in 1794, that it could be said, we had conquered the Savages. It was not till that period, that the Government could have considered a itself as having established an entireability to protect those who should undertake the conquest of the wilderness. And here, sir, at the epoch of 1794, let us pause, and survey the scene. It is now thirty-five years since that scene actually existed. Let us, sir, look back and behold it. Over all that is now Ohio, there then stretched one vast wilderness, unbroken, except by two small spots of civilized culture, the one at Marietta, and the other at Cincinnati. At these little openings, hardly each a pin’s point upon the map, the arm of the frontiersman had level. led the forest, and let in the sun. These little patches of earth, and themselves almost shadowed by the over—hanging houghs of that wilderness, which had stood and perpetu- ated itself, from century to century, ever since the creation, were all that had then been rendered verdant by the hand of man. In an extent of hundreds, and thousands of square miles, no other surface of smiling green attested the presence of civilization. The hunter-’s path crossed mighty rivers, flowing in solitary grandeur, whosesources lay in remote and 8 unknown regions of the wilderness. It struck, upon the North, on a vast inland sea, over which the wintry tempests raged as on the ocean. All around was bare creation. It was fresh. untouched, unbounded, magnificent wilderness. And, sir, what is it now I’ Is it imagination only, or can it possibly be fact, that presents such a change, as surprises and astonishes us, when we turn our eyes to what Ohio now is ? Is it reality or adream, that, in so short a period even as thirty-five years, there has sprung up, on the same surface, an independent State, with a million of people E A million of inhabitants! An amount of population greater than that of all the Cantons of Switzerland ; equal to one-third of all the people of the United States, when they undertook to accomplish their Independence. This new member of the Republic has already left far behind her, a majority of the old States. She is now by the side of Virginia and Pennsylvania; and, in point of numbers, will shortly admit no equal but New York herself. If, sir, we may judge of measures by their results, what lessons do these facts read us, upon the policy of the Government? What in- ferences do they authorize, upon the general question of kind- ness, or unkindness? What convictions do they enforce, as to the wisdom and ability, on the one hand, or the folly and in- capacity, on the other, of our general administration of west- ern affairs? Sir, does it not require some portion of self-re» spect in us, to imagine, that if our light had shone on the path of Government, if our Wisdom could have been consulted in its measures, a more rapid advance to strength and pros» perity would have been experienced ? For my own part, while I am struck with wonder at the success, I also look with ad- miration at the wisdom and foresight which originally arrang- ed and prescribed the system for the settlement of the public domain. Its operation has been, without a moment’s inter- ruption, topush the settlement of the western country to th full extent of our utmost means. But, sir, to return to the remarks of the honorable member from South Carolina. He says that Congress has "sold these it iantis, and put the money into the '1‘reasury, while other Go» vernments, acting in a more liberal spin-it, gave away their lands ; and that we ought, also, to have given ours away. I shall not stop to state an account between our revenues deriv- ed from land, and our expenditures in Indian treaties and In» dian wars. But, I must refer the honorable gentleman to the origin of our own title to the soil of these Territories, and remind him that we received them on conditions, and under trusts, which would have been violated by giving the soil away. For compliance with those conditions, and the just execution of those trusts, the public faith was solemnly pledg- ed. The public lands of the United States have been derived. from four principal sources. Fll'SlI: (Sessions made to the United States by indivitlual States, on the recommendation or request of the Old Congress. Second: 'I‘he compactwith ‘Georgia, in 1802. Third : The purchase of Louisiana, in 1803. Fourth: The purchase of Florida, in 1819,. Of the lirst class‘, the most impoitant was the cession by Virginia, of all her right and title, as well of soil as of jurisdiction, to all the territory within the limits of her charter, lying to the northwest of the river Ohio. It may not be ill—timed to recur to the causes and occasions of this and the other similar grants. ‘When the war of the Revolution brol~;e out, a ,:'~_.',"ll’O.‘-ti’. difi“er- «ence existed, in differeynt States, in the proportion between people and territory. Tile, Northern and Eastern States, with very small surfaces, contained comparatively a thick popula-— tion, and there was generally within their limits no great quantity of waste lands belonging to the Government, or the Crown of England. On the contrary, there were in the Southern States---in Virginia and in Georgia t'oi'e:aa:inple-m. extensive public domains, wholly unsettled, and belonging to the Crown. As these possessions would necessarily fall from the Crown, in the event of a prosperous issue of the war, it was insisted that they ought to devolve on the United States, for the good of the wlnolie. The war, it was argued, was 57 --‘.5 1 Cl undertaken and carried on at the common expense of all the colonies; its benefits, if successful, ought also to be common ;. and the property of the common enemy, when vanquished, ought to be regarded as the general acquisition of all. While yet the war was raging, it was contended that Congress ought to have the power to dispose of vacant and unpatented lands, commonly called Crown lands, for defraying the expenses of the war, and for other public and general purposes. “Reason and justice,” said the General Assembly of New Jersey, in N78, “must decide, that the property which existed in the Crown of Great Britain, previous to the present Revolution, ought now to belong to the Congress, in trust for the use and henefit of the United States. They have fought and bled for it, in proportion to their respective abilities, and, therefore, the reward ought not to he predilectionally distributed. Shall such States as are shut out, by situation, from availing them»- selves of the least advantage from this quarter, be left to sink under an enormous debt, whilst others are enabled, in a short- period, to replace all their expenditures from the hard earnings of the whole confederocy B” Moved by these considerations, and these addresses made to it, Congress took up the subject, and in September, 17 80, re» commended to the several States in the Union, having claims to ‘Western Territory, to make liberal sessions of a portion thereof to the United States; and on the lbthof October, 1'i'80, Congress resolved, that only lands so ceded, in pursutmco of their preceding recoznmsndation, should be disposed of for the common benefit of the United States 5 should be settled and - _formed into distinct Republican States, to become members of the Federal Union, ‘with the same right of sovereignty, freedom, and independence as the other States .- and that the lands shoulrl be granted, or settled, at such times, and under such regulations, as should be agreed on by Congress. Again, in September, 1783, Congress passed another resolution, ez-tpressing the con» ditions on which sessions from States should he received; . 4-m" M and in October following, Virginia made her cessiou, reciting the resolution, or act, of September preceding, and then transferring her title to her Northwestern Territory to the United States, upon the express condition, that the llunds, so ceded, should be considered as a. common fund for theuse and benefit of such of the United States as had become, or should become, members of the CO7y08d8’l"(1l’l07l, Virginia inclusive, and should he faithfully and bona. fide disposed of for that purpose, S and for no other use or purpose whcitsoever. The grants from other States were on similar conditions. Massachusetts and Connecticut both had claims to western lands, and both relinquished them to the United States in the same manner. These grants were all made on three substantial conditions or trusts. First, that the ceded Territories should be formed into States, and admitted, in due time, into the Union, with all the rights belonging to other States. Second, that the lands should form a common fund, to be disposed of for the general benefit of all the States. Third, that they should be sold and settled, at such time, and in such manner, as Congress should direct. Now, sir, it is plain that Congress never has been, and is not now, at liberty to disregard these solemn conditions. For the fulfilment of all these trusts, the public faith Was, and is, fully pledged. How, then, would it have been possible for Congress, if it had been so disposed, to give away these public lands? How could they have followed the example of other Governments, if there had been such, and considered the conquest of the wilderness an equivalent compensation for the soil? The States had looked to this Territory, perhaps too sangninely, as a fund out of which means were to come to defray the expenses of the war. It had been received as a fund, as a fund Congress had bound itself to apply it. To have given it away, would have defeated all the objects which Congress, and particular States, had had in view, in asking andpobtaiuing the cessiou, and would plainly have violated the conditions which the ceiling; States attached to their own grants, 12 The , gentleman admits that the lands cannot be given away until the national debt is paid ; because to a part of that debt they stand pledged. But this is not the original pledge. There is, so to speak, an earlier mortgage. Before the debt was funded, at the mornentmof the cession of the lands, and by the very terms of that cession, every State in the Union obtained an interest in them, as in a common fund. Congress has uniformly adhered to this condition. It has proceeded to sell the lands, and realize as much from them, as was compatible with the other trusts created by the same deeds of cession. One of these conditions, or trusts, as I have already said, was, that the lands should be sold and settled, at such time and man- ner as Congress shall direct. The Government has always felt itself bound, in regard to sale and settlement, to exercise its own best judgment, and not to transfer that discretion to others. lt has not felt itself at liberty to dispose of the soil, there- fore, in large masses, to individuals, thus leaving to them the time and manner of settlement. It had stipulated to use its own judgment. If, for instance, in order to rid itself of the trouble of forming a system for the sale of those lands, and going into detail, it had sold the whole of what is now Ohio, in one mass, to individuals, or companies, it would clearly have departed from its just obligations. And who can now tell or conjecture, how great would have been the evil of such a course ? Who can say, what mischiefs would have ensued, if Congress had thrown these territories into the hands of pri- vate speculation ? Or who, on the other hand, can now fore-l see, what the event would he, should the Government depart from the same wise course hereafter; and not contentwith such constant absorption of the public lands as the natural growth of our population may accomplish, should force great portions of them, at nominal or very low prices, into private hands, to he sold and settled, as and when such holders might think would be most for their own interest? Hitherto, sir, I maintain, Congress has acted wisely, and done its duty on this subject. I hope it will continue to do it. Departing from the original idea, so soon as it was found practicable and con» 13 venient, of selling by townships, Congress has disposed of the soil inwsmaller and still smaller portions, till, at length, it sells in parcels of no more than eighty acres; thus putting it into the power of every man in the country, however poor, but who has health and strength, to become a freeholder if he de- sires, not of barren acres, but of rich and fertile soil. The Government has performed all the conditions of the grant.--» While it has regarded the public lands as a common fund, and has sought to make what reasonably could he made of them, as a source of revenue, it has also applied its best wisdom to sell and settle them, as fast and as happily as possible; and whensoever numbers would warrant it, each Territory has been successively admitted into the Union, withall the rights of an independent State. Is there, then, sir, I ask, any well founded charge of hard dealing; any just accusation for negligence, indifference, or parsimony, which is capable of being sustained. against ,the Government of the country. in its conduct towards the new States? Sir, I think there is not. But there was another observation from the hon. Member, which, I confess, did not a little surprise me. As a reason for wishing to get rid of the public lands as soon as we could, and as we might, the hon. gentleman said he wanted no permanent sources of income. He wished to see the time when the Go» vernment should not possess a shilling of permanent revenue. If he could speak a magical word, and by that word convert the whole Capitol into gold, the word should not be spoken. The administration of a fixed revenue, he said, only consoli-» dates the Government, and corrupts the People! Sir, I con» fess I heard these sentiments uttered on this floor not without deep regret and pain. I am aware that these and similar opinions are espoused by certain personsout of the Capitol, and out of this Government =--hut I did not expect so soon to find them here. Cousolidau 14: tion!-~—-that perpetual cry, both of terror and delusion----con- solidation ! Sir, when gentlemen speak of the effects of a com- mon fund, belonging to all the States, as having a tendency to consolidation, what do they mean 3 Do they mean, or can they mean, any thing more than that the Union of the States will be strengthened, by whatever continues, or furnishes induce- ments to the People of the States to hold together? If they mean merely this, then, no doubt, the public lands, as well as every thing else in which we have a common interest, tends to consolidation ; and to this species of consolidation every true American ought to be attached; it is neither more nor less than strengthening the Union itself. This is the sense in which the framers of the Constitution use the word ‘ Consolidation ;’ and in which sense I adopt and cherish it. They tell us, in the letter submitting the Constitution to the consideration of the country, that---“ In all our deliberations on this subject, we kept 4‘ steadily in our view that which appears to as the ,greateslin- “ terest of every true flmerican, the consolidation of our Uniom 6‘ in ~w/zieh is involvezl our prosperity, felicity, safety, perhaps N our national existence. This important consideration, seri- “ ously and deeply impressed on our minds, led each State in the “ Convention to be less rigid, on points of inferior magnitude, “ than might have been otherwise expected.” This, sir, is General Washingtorfls consolidation. This is the true constitutional consolidation. I wish to see no new powers drawn to the General Government; but I confess I re- joice in whatever tends to strengthen the bond that unites us, and encourages the hope that our Union may be perpetual. And, tlierefbre, I cannot but feel regret at the expression of such opinions as the gentleman has avowed; because I ‘think. their obvious tendency is to weaken the bond of our connexion. I know that there are some persons in the part of the country from which the hon. member comes, who habitually speak of the Union in terms of indifference, or even of disparagement. The hon. member himself is not, I trust, and can never be, 15 one of these- They significantly declare that it his time to cal» culate the value Q)” the Union; and their aim seems to he to enumerate, and to magnify, all the evils, real and imaginary, which the Government, under the Union, produces. The tendency of all these ideas and sentiments is obviously to bring the Union into discussion, as a more question of pre-» sent and temporary expediency-—-—notl1ing more than a mere matter of profit and loss. The Union, to be preserved, while it suits local and temporary purposes to preserve it ; and to he sundered Vvlienever it shall he found to thwart such purposes. Union, of itself, is considered by the disciples of this school as hardly a good. It is only regarded as a possible means of good ; or, on the other hand, as a possible means of evil. They cherish no deep and fixed regard for it, flowing from a thorough conviction of its absolute and vital necessity to our welfare. Sir, l deprecate and deplore this tone of thinking and acting. I deem far otherwise of the Union of the States; and so did the framers of the Constitution themselves. What. they said E believe, fully and sincerely believe, that the Union of the States is essential to the prosperity and safety of the States. I am a Unionist, and, in this sense, a National Republican. I would strengthen the ties that hold us together. Far, indeed, in my wishes, very far distant be the day, when our associated and fraternal stripes shall be severed asunder, and when that happy constellation under which we have risen to so much renown, shall be broken up, and be seen sinking, star after star, into obscurity and night ! Among other things, the hon. member spoke of the public debt. To that he holds the public lands pledged, and has ex- pressed his usual earnestness for its total discharge. Sir, I have always voted for every measure for reducing the debt, since I have been in Congress. I wish it paid because it is a. debt, and, so far, is a charge upon the industry of the country, and the finances of the Government. But, sir, I have observa- :1. ti ed, that, whenever the subject of the public debt is introduced into the Senate, a morbid sort of fervor is*manil'ested in regard to it, which I have been sometimes at a loss to lunderstand. The debt is not now large, and is in a course of most rapid re- duction. A very few years will see it extinguished. Now, I am not entirely able to persuade. myself that it is not certain supposed incidental tendencies and efi"ects of this debt, rather than its pressure and charge as a debt, that cause so much anx- iety to get rid of it. Possibly it may be regarded as in some degree a tie, holding the different parts of the country together, by considerationsof mutual interest. If this be one of its eff- fects, the effect itself is, in my opinion, not to be lamented. Let me not“‘be misunderstood. E would not continue the debt for the sake of any collateral or consequential advantage, such as I have mentioned. I only mean to say, that that consequence itself“ is not one that I regret. If there are others who would, or who do regret it, I differ from them. As i have already remarked, sir, it was one among the rea-- sons assigned by the hon. member for his wish to be rid of the public lands altogether, that the public disposition of them, and the revenues derived from them, tend to corrupt the Peo- ple. This, sir, I czonfess, passes my C()l1'l[')l"£;‘.ll'l€‘»llSlOll. These lands are sold at public auction, or taken up at fixed prices, to form farms and freeholds. Whoni does this corrupt? Accord- ing to the system of sales, a fixed proportion is every where reserved as a fund for education. Does education corrupt? Is the schoolmaster a corrupter of youth P The spelling book, does it break down the morals of the rising generation ? And the Holy Scriptures, are they fountains of corruption E’ Or if. in the exercise of a provident liberality, in regard to its own property as a great landed proprietor, and to high purposes of utility towards others, the Government gives portions of these lands to the making of a canal, or the opening of a road, in the country, where the lands themselves are situated, what alarming and overwhelming corruption follows from all this 3’ Li '7 ifian there he nothing pure in Govermnent, except the e:«:ere‘lise. of more control ? Can notliing be done without corruption, but the imposition of penalty and restraint 3’ Whatever is positively heneficent, whatever is actively good, whatever spreads abroad henefitsl and blessings which all can see, and all can feel, whatever opens intercourse, augments population, enhances the value of property and diffuses knowledge---must all this he rejected and rcprohated as a dangerous and obnoxious policy, hurrying us to the double ruin of a Government, turned into despotism by the more exercise of acts of heneficence, and of a people, corrupted, heyond hope of rescue, by the improve» inent of their condition l The gentleman proceeded, sir, to draw a l‘i'ightt‘ul picture of the future. He spoke of the centuries that must elapse, before all the lands could he sold, and the great hardships that the States must suffer while the United States reserved to itsellf, within their limits, such large portions of soil, not liable to tax- ation. Sir, this is all, or mostly, imagination. it’ these lands were leasehold property, if they were held by the United States «on rent, there would he ranch in the idea. But they are wild lands, held only till they can he sold 1*esert'eil‘ii«i longer than till somebody will take them up, at low prices. As to their not being taxed, I would ask whetlier the States themselves, it” ‘ they owned them, would tax them before sale P Sir, if in any ease, any State can shew that the policy of the United States retards her settlement, or prevents her from c,ultivati.ng the lands within her limits, she shall have my vote to alter that policy. But I look upon the public lands as a public. land, and that we are no more authorized to give them away gratui- .-tously than to give away gratuitously the money in the ’l‘r;ea-» sury. I am quite aware, that the sums drawn annually from the Western States make a heavy drain upon them, hut that is itinavvoidahle. For that very reason, among others, I have al-- ways been inclined to pursue towards them a kind and most liiherail policy, but I am not at liberty to forget, at the some {ii .18 time, what is due to other States, and to the solemn engagea meats under which the (iiovernment rests. I come now, Mr. President, to that part of the lgentliemaws speech, which has been the main occasion of my addressing the Senate. The East I the obnoxious, the rebuked, the al» ways reproached East I We have come in, sir, on this debate t'o1-even more than a common share of accusation and attack. It’ the honorable member from South Carolina was not our ori-« ginal accuser, he has, yet, recited the indictment against us, with the air and tone of a public prosecutor. He has summon» ed us to plead, on our arraignment; and: he tells us we are charged with the crime of a narrow and selfish policy ; of en» deavoring to restrain emigration to the West, and, having that object in view, of maintaining a steady opposition to western» measures and western interests. And the cause of all this nar» row and selfish policy, the gentleman finds in the tariff, I think. he called it the accursed policy of the tarifil This policy, the gentleman tells us, requires multitudes of dependent laborers, a population of paupers, and that it is to secure these at home, that the East opposes whatever may induce to western cmigrav tion. Sir, I rise to defend the East. a I rise to repel, both the charge itself, and the cause assigned for it. I deny that the East has, at any time, shown an illiberal policy towards the West. I pronounce the whole accusation to be without the least foundation in any facts, existing either now, or at any previous time. I deny it in the general, and I deny each and all its particulars. I deny the sum total, and I deny the dew tail. I deny that the East has ever manifested hostility to the West, and I deny that she has adopted any policy that would naturally have led her in such a course. But the tarifi' .' the tariff E! Sir, I beg to say, in regard to the East, that the ori-= ginal policy of the tariff is not hers, whether it be wise or un-we a wise. New England is not its author. If gentlemen will recur to the tarifi of 1816, they will find that that was not carried by New England rotes. It was, truly, more a Southern, their 19 an Eastern measure. And what votes carried the tarittof 189.43’ Certainly, not those of New England. It is known to have heen made matter of reproach, especially against Massachu- setts, that she would not aid the tariff oi'18:24, and a sel- fish motive was imputed to her for that also. In point of fact, it is true she did, indeed, oppose the tariff of 1824. There were more votes in favor of that law in the House of Representatives, not only in each of a majority of the Western States, but even in Virginia herself also, than in Massachu-. setts. It was literally forced upon New England; and this shows how groundless, ‘how void of all probability any charge must be, which imputes to her hostility to the growth of the Western States, as naturally flowing from a cherished policy of her own. But leaving all conjectures about causes and mo- tives, I go at once to the fact, and I meet it with one broad, comprehensive, and emphatic negative. I deny, that in any part of’ her history, at any period of the Government, or in re» lation to any leading subject, N ew England has manifested such hostility as is charged upon her. On the contrary, I maintain that, from the day of the cession of the Territories, by the States, to Congress, no portion of the country has acted either with more liberality or more intelligence, on the subject of the western lands in the new States, than New England. This statement, though strong, is no stronger than the strictest truth will warrant. Let us look at the historical facts. So soon as the cessions were obtained, a it became necessary to make pro» vision for the government and disposition of the Territory...... the country was to be governed. This, for the present, it was obvious, must be by some territorial system of administration. But the soil, also, was to be granted and settled. Those im- mense regions, large enough almost for an empire, were to be appropriated to private ownership. How was this best to be done ? What system for sale and disposition should he adopted ? Two modes for conducting the sales presented themselves; the one a Southern and the other a Northern mode. It would he tedious, sir, here to run out these didhrent systems, into all 20 their distinctions, and to contrast their opposite results. That which was adopted was the Northern system, and is that which we now see in successful operation in all the new States. That which was rejected, was the system of warrants, surveys, entry, and location ; such as prevails south of the Ohio. It is not necessary to extend these remarks into invidieus compari--- sons. This last system, is that Which, as has been emphati- cally said, has shiizgleil over the country to which it was ap- plied, with so many conflicting titles and claims. Every body acquainted with the subject, knows how easily it leads to spe-» culation and litigation---two great calamities in a new country. From the system actually established, these evils are banish»- ed. ‘ Now, sir, in effecting this great measure, the firstimpor—- taut measure on the whole subject, New England acted with vigor and effect ; and the latest posterity of those who settled northwest of the Ohio, will have reason to remember, with gratitude, her patriotism and her wisdom. The system adopted was her own system. She knew, for she had tried and proved its value. It was the old-fashioned way of’ sur» veying lands. before the issuing of any title papers, and then of inserting accurate and precise descriptions in the patents or grants, and proceeding with regular reference to mates and bounds. This gives to original titles, derived from Govern» ment, a certain and fixed character; it cuts up litigation by the roots, and the settler commences his labors with the assu» trance that he has a clear title. It is easy to perceive, but not easy to measure, the importance of this in a new country. New England gave this system to the West ; and while it re- mains, there will be spread over all the VVest, one monument of her intelligence in matters of government, and her practical good sense. t Then comes, sir, the renowned ordinance of 1787, which lies at the foundation of the Constitutions of these new north» western States. We are accustomed, sir, to praise the law» girers of antiquity 3: we help to perpetuate the fame of Solon $1 and Lycurgus; but I doubt whether one single law of any lavvgiver, ancient or modern, has produced effects of more distinct, marked, and lasting character, than the ordinance of ’87. That instrument was drawn by NATHAN DANE, then, and now, a citizen of Massachusetts. It was adopted, as I think I have understood, without the slightest alteration ; and certainly it has happened to few men, to be the authors of a political measure of more large and enduring consequence. It fixed, forever, the character of the population in the vast regions northwest of the Ohio, by excluding from them in-= voluntary servitude. It impressed on the soil itself, while it was yet a wilderness, an incapacity to bear up any other than free men. It laid the interdict against personal servitude, in original compact, not only deeper than all local law, but deeper, also, than all local constitutions. Under the circum- stances then existing, I look upon this original and season- able provision as a vast good attained. We see its conse- quences at this moment, and we shall never cease to see them, while the Ohio shall flow. It was a great and sa—- lutary measure of prevention. Sir, I should fear the rebuke , of no intelligent gentleman of Kentucky, were I to ask whe- ther, if such an ordinance could have been applied to his own State, while it yet was a wilderness, and before Boone had passed the gap of the Allegany, he does nottsuppose it would have contributed to the ultimate greatness of that common- wealth? It is, at any rate, not to be doubted, that, whereit did apply, it has produced an effect not easily to be described, or measured, in the growth of the States, and the extent and increase of their population. Now, sir, this great measure, again, was carried by the North, and by the North alone. There were, indeed, individuals elsewhere favorable toit ; but it was supported, as a measure, entirely by the votes of the Northern States. It‘ New England had been governed by the narrow and selfish views now ascribed to her, this very mea- sure was, of all others, the best calculated to thwart her pur-« poses. It was, of all things, the very} means of rendering. 22 certain a vast emigration from her own population to the West. She looked to that consequence only to disregard it. y She deemed the regulation a most useful one to the States that would spring up on the territory, and advantageous to the country at large. She adhered to the principle of it perse- veringly, year after year, until it was finally accomplished. Leaving, then, Mr. President, these two great and leading measures, and coming down to our own times, what is there, in the history of recent measures of Government, that exposes New England to this accusation of hostility to Western in- terests? I assert, boldly, that in all measures conducive to the welfare of the West, since my acquaintance here, no part of the country has manifested a more liberal policy. I beg to say, sir, that I do not state this with a view of claiming for her any special regard on that account. Not at all. She does not place her support of measures on the ground of favor conferred----far otherwise. What she has done, has been con- sonant to her View of the general good, and, therefore, she has done it. She has sought to make no gain of it; on the con- trary, individuals may have felt undoubtedly some natural ‘ regret, at finding the relative importance of their own States diminished by the growth of the West. But New England has regarqled that, as in the natural course of things, and has never complained of it. Let me see, sir, any one measure fa- vorable to the West, which has been opposed by New Eng- land since the Government bestowed its attention to these West- ern improvements. Select what you will, if it be a measure of acknowledged utility, I answer for it, it will be found that not only were New England votes for it, but that New Eng- land votes carried it. Will you take the Cumberland road-- Who has made that P Will you take the Portland Canal----- whose support carried that bill ? Sir, at what period beyond the Greek kalends, could these measures, or measures like these, have been accomplished, had they depended on the votes of Southern gentlemen P Why, sir, we know that we must 23 have waited till the constitutional notions of those gentlemen had undergone an entire change. Generally speaking, they have done nothing, and can do nothing. All that has been eflected, has been done by the votes of reproached New Eng- land. I undertake to say, sir, that if you look to the votes on any one of these measures, and strike outfrom the list of ayes the names of New England members, it will he found that in every case, the South would then have voted down the West, and the measure would have failed. i do not believe any one ‘ instance can be found where this is not strictly true. I do not believe that one dollar has been expended for these purposes beyond the mountain, which could have been obtained without cordial co-operation and support from New England. Sir, I put the question to the West itself. Let gentlemen who have sat here ten years, come forth and declare, by what aids, and by whose votes, they have succeeded, in measures deemed of ‘essential importance to their part of the country. To all men of sense and candour, in or out of Congress, who have any knowledge upon the subject, New England may ap-~ peal, for refutation of the reproach now attempted to be cast upon her, in this respect. a I take liberty to repeat, that l rnalee no claim, on behalf oi” New England, on account oi‘ that which I have now stated. She does not profess to have acted out of favor : for it would not become her so to have acted. She solicits for no especial thanks _; but, in the consciousness of having done her duty in these things, uprightly and honestly, and with a fair and libe- ral spirit, be assuredshe will repel, whenever she thinks the occasion calls for it, an unjust and groundless imputation of partiality and selfishness. ‘ i The gentleman alluded to a report of the late Secretary of the Treasury, which, according to his reading or construction of it, recommended what he calls the tariff’ policy, or a branch of L261 that policy; that is, the restraining of emigration to the West, for the purpose of keeping hands at home, to carry on the manufac-« tures. I think, sir, that the gentleman misapprehended the mean-4 ing ofthe Secretary, in the interpretation given to his reznerks’... I understand him only as saying, that since the low price cl" lands at the West acts as a. constant and standing bounty to agriculture, it is, on that account, the more reasonable to pm. vide encouregenient for manufactures. But, sir, even it’ the Secretary’s observation were to he understood as the gentle... man understands it, it would not be a sentiment borrowed l'ro1n any New England source. Whether it be right or wrong, it does not originate in that quarter. In the course of these remzu'l~:.s, Mr. Pl'@SldGl"li, I have spok- en oi‘ the supposed desire, on the part of the Atlantic States, to check, or at least not to hasten, western e:ni,