sions into effect; and that the registers and receivers of the several land offices shall be entitled to receive the same compensation for any lands entered under the provisions of this act that they are now entitled to receive when the same quantity of land is entered with money, one-half to be paid by the person making the application at the time of so doing, and the other half on the issue of the certificate, by the person to whom it may be issued: Provided, That nothing contained in this act shall be so construed as to impair or interfere in any manner whatever with existing preëmption rights: And provided, further, That all persons who may have filed their applications for a preêmption right prior to the passage of this act shall be entitled to all privileges of this act. Subsequently, a motion was made by Mr. Lovejoy, to reconsider the vote by which the bill had been referred to the Committee of the Whole. On Monday, March 12, Mr. Lovejoy called up this motion, and under the operation of the previous question, it was agreed to, 106 to 67, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Adrain, Aldrich, Ashley, Babbitt, Bingham, Blake, Buffinton, Burlingame, Campbell, Carey, Carter, Case, John Cochrane, Colfax, Conkling, Cooper, Corwin, Covode, Cox, James Craig, Curtis, John G, Davis, Dawes, Delano, Duell, Dunn, Edgerton, Elliot, Fenton, Ferry, Florence, Foster, Fouke, Frank, French, Gooch, Graham, Grow, Gurley, Hale, Hall, Haskin, Helmick, Hoard, Holman, Howard, Hutchins, Junkin, Francis W. Kellogg, William Kellogg, Kilgore, Killinger, Larrabee, De Witt C. Leach, Lee, Logan, Loomis, Lovejoy, Maclay, Marston, Charles D. Martin, McClernand, McKean, McKnight, Millward, Moorhead, Morrill, Edward Joy Morris, Morse, Olin, Pendleton, Perry, Porter, Potter, Pottle, Rice, Riggs, Christopher Robinson, James C. Robinson, Royce, Schwartz Scott, Scranton, Sedgwick, Sherman, Somes, Spinner, Stanton, Stout, Stratton, Tappan, Thayer, Tompkins, Train, Trimble, Vallandigham, Vandever, Verree, Waldron, Walton, Cadwalader C. Washburn, Ellihu B. Washburne, Israel Washburn, Wells, Windom, and Woodruff-106. NAYS-Messrs. GREEN ADAMS, Thomas L. Anderson, WILLIAM C. ANDERSON. Avery, Barksdale, Bocock, Bonham, BRABSON, Branch, BRISTOW, Burch, Burnett, Clopton, Cobb, Curry, Reuben Davis, De Jarnette, Edmundson, English, ETH RIDGE, Garnett, Gartrell, GILMER, Hardeman, J. MORRISON HARRIS, HATTON, HILL, Hindman, Houston, Hughes, Jackson, Jenkins, Jones, Keitt, Lamar, Landrum, Leake, Love, MALLORY, Elbert S. Martin, MAYNARD, McQueen, McRae, Miles, Millson, Montgomery, NELSON, Niblack, Noell, Peyton, Pryor, Pugh, Reagan, Ruffin, Sickles, Simms, Singleton, William Smith, WILLIAM N. H. SMITH, Stevenson, STOKES, Underwood, VANCE, WEBSTER, Whiteley, Woodson, and Wright-67. Roman spaced. Republicans in Roman; Democrats in Italics; Americans in SMALL CAPS; Anti-Lecompton Democrats in So the motion was reconsidered, and the bill was before the House. Mr. Lovejoy moved that the bill be engrossed and read a third time. Mr. Branch (N. C.) moved to lay the bill on the table. Lost, 62 to 112, the yeas being all from the South, except Mr. Montgomery, Democrat, of Pennsylvania, and the nays all from the North, except Mr. James Craig, Democrat, of Missouri. So the House refused to lay the bill on the table; and it was read a third time and passed. The vote was as follows-The Republicans in Roman, the Administration Democrats in Italics, the Americans in SMALL CAPS, and the AntiLecompton Democrats in Roman spaced: YEAS. NEW-JERSEY.-Adrain, Riggs, Stratton-3. PENNSYLVANIA.-Babbitt, Campbell, Covode, Florence, Grow, Hale, Hall, Hickman, Junkin, Killenger, McKnight, McPherson, Millward, E. Joy Morris, Schwartz Scranton, Verree-17. OHIO.-Ashley, Bingham, Blake, Carey, Corwin, Cox, Edgerton, Gurley, Helmick, Howard, Hutchins, Charles D. Martin, Pendleton, Sherman, Stanton, Tompkins, Trimble, Vallandigham-18. MICHIGAN -Cooper, Francis W. Kellogg, De Witt C. INDIANA.-Case, Colfax, John G. Davis, Dunn, MISSOURI.-James Craig-1. Total, 115. All from the Free States except James Craig, of Missouri. NAYS. PENNSYLVAVIA. - Montgomery-1. DELAWARE.-Whiteley-1. MARYLAND.-H. WINTER DAVIS, J. M. HARRIS, Hughes, WEBSTER-4. VIRGINIA. Bocock, De Jarnette, Edmundson, Garnett, Jenkins, Leake, Elbert S. Martin, Wilson, Pryor, William Smith-10. NORTH CAROLINA.-Branch, GILMER, Ruffin, WILLIAM SOUTH CAROLINA. - Bonham, Keith, McQueen, Miles-2. ALABAMA.-Clopton, Cobb, Curry, Houston, Suyden ham Moore, Pugh-6. Dem., This bill was sent to the Senate, where it was referred to the Committee on Public Lands, and on the 17th of April, Mr. Johnson, of Tennessee, the Chairman of that Committee, reported a substitute for the House bill, granting Homesteads to actual settlers, at 25 cents per acre, but not including preemptors then occupying the Public Lands. When this bill came before the Senate for action, Mr. Wade, of Ohio, moved to amend, by substituting the House bill, which was lost, 26 to 31, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Bingham, Cameron, Chandler, Clarks Collamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Douglas, Durkee, NAYS-Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Brown, Yeas, all Republicans except three, Douglas, MAINE.-Foster, French, Morse, Perry, Somes, Israel Rice, and Toombs. Nays, all Democrats. Washburn-6. NEW-HAMPSHIRE. -Marston, Tappan-2. MASSACHUSETTS.-Buffinton, Dawes, Delano, Elliot, NEW-YORK.-Barr, BRIGGS, Carter, John Cochrane, Hoard, Humphrey, Lee, Maclay, McKean, Olin, Pottle, The Senate finally, on the 10th May, passed Mr. Johnson's bill, 44 to 8, the Nays being Messrs. Bragg, Clingman, Hamlin, Hunter, Mason, Pearce, Powell and Toombs. The House refused to concur; the Senate refused to recede, and the result was a protracted conference on the part of Committees of the two Houses, which committees finally came to an agreement, on the 19th June, by the House accepting the Senate bill with slight amendments. On that day Mr. Schuyler Colfax reported to the House as follows: Mr. Colfax.-I rise to a question of privilege. I am instructed by the Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Homestead bill, to report that, after twelve meetings of the three different Conferences that have been appointed, they this morning finally agreed. I hold in my hand the report of the Committee, which can be read if any gentleman desires it. But perhaps it would render the report clearer and more intelligible if I should briefly state its leading features. The Senate bill all the members of the House are familiar with. The Conferees upon the part of the House finding, after the most earnest efforts, that it would be utterly impossible for them to induce the Senate to agree to the House bill, have been discussing what changes could be made in the Senate bill, so as to render it acceptable enough for the House to accept, rather than the whole should fail. They have finally agreed upon a report as follows: In the first place, I will say that the bill, as it passed the Senate, provided that the preemptors now upon the public lands might remain there two years before they should be required to purchase their lands, but should then pay for them at the rate of $1 25 per acre, thus removing them entirely from within the purview of the benefits which would apply to the settlers hereafter upon the public lands. This point the House Conferees refused to accede to, and if persisted in, we should have again reported a disagreement. Finally, however, a compromise was arranged on this point, and to protect the preemptors now on the Government land, which was to be advertised this fall for sale, we changed the Senate bill so as to protect them for at least two years from land sales, and to allow them then to secure their homes at one half the Government price, namely sixty-two and a-half cents per acre. I need scarcely add, that, if the Senate could have been induced to give them the benefit of their twenty-five-cent-per-acre provision, we should have insisted on it inflexibly; but what I have stated is the very lowest point that could be obtained. The second change we have made in the Senate bill is in relation to the scope of land coming under the operations of the law. The House bill embraced all the Government land, offered or unoffered, except such as was specially reserved. The Senate bill confined its provisions to land subject to private entry, exclusively. As I have explained on a former occasion, the expression "subject to private entry" means such as are left after the lands have been once regularly brought into market, exposed to public sale, and the speculators have taken such as they see fit to purchase. The difference between these two bills seemed so radical as to be incapable of adjustment; and the scope of farming land covered by the Senate bili was so limited, there being but little, if any, in Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, California, Oregon, and Washington, that the House conferees declined to accept it. But on this, too, we finally effected a compromise. By our report, all the land subject to private entry is included, and, in addition, all the odd-numbered sections of the surveyed public lands, which have not been opened to public sale-a most material and beneficent enlargement of the Senate bill. We were offered, after this agreement, whichever half of the unoffered lands we chose, and we took the odd-numbered sections. The reason for this was, that the 16th section of a township, being reserved for school purposes by our land laws, the four adjoining sections to it, on the north, west, east, and south, are sections 9, 15, 17, and 21, all odd-numbered sections, which are thus saved for homestead settlers, who have reserved for them 18 out of the 35 disposable sections in each township of six miles square. On all these lands, actual settlers, who are heads of families, are allowed, after having occupied the land for five years, to purchase at 25 cents per acre, which is about the average cost price of the public lands to the Government. We struggled, of course, to include all young men over 21 who are not heads of families, and to adopt the Free Homestead principle of the House bill; but on these points the Senate was inflexible, and we took what we did because it was the very best we could get. The Senate bill originally provided that the Homestead settler might acquire title to his land at any time by paying full Government prices; but desiring to promote actual settlement, we now provide that he cannot do this till after he has been on the land six months. When he stays, or his family if he deceases, the full five years he obtains it at 25 cents per acre. The Senate have also agreed to strike out the eighth section of their bill, which made it imperative upon the President to ex pose all public lands to sale within two years after they shall have been surveyed, which we held would be peculiarly oppressive upon the pioneers who had gone to the frontier to settle upon the public lands, and to which we could never have consented. Now, Mr. Speaker, I desire to state, in conclusion, that the compromise we have made upon the subject is not in accordance with what I should desire to have passed, if I had the power to frame the bill myself; but it is the very utmost we could obtain from the Senate, as now constituted. The Senators who served with us on the Conference have been notified by me, and also by my colleague (Mr. Windom, of Minnesota,) that we regard this as but a single step in advance toward a law which we shall demand from the American Congress, enacting a comprehensive and liberal Homestead policy. This we have agreed to as merely an avant courrier. We shall demand it at the next session of Congress, and until it is granted; until all the public lands shall be open to all the people of the United States; and I state this publicly, that no one shall regard us as estopped hereafter, because we accepted this half-way measure rather than to allow the whole to fail. I should have added that all persons, whether citizens or those who have only. declared their intentions, are allowed to go on the lands under this bill; but are required to perfect their naturalization before the five years expire, and the patent issues. I now demand the previous question on concurring on the report of the Committee, and passing the bill as thus amended. Mr. Farnsworth. -I desire to ask the gentleman from Indiana whether this bill confines its benefits to those who are heads of families. Mr. Colfax. It does, because we failed, despite our utmost efforts, in procuring its extension to all; but we shall appeal to the young men to demand of those who make and who execute the laws, that the system inaugurated by this bill, shall be widened so as to admit them to its benefits, and I will join them in this demand. Mr. Grow. I just desire to say that we have taken this bill, not because it is what we want, but on the principle that "half a loaf is better than no bread." The House agreed to the Report of the Committee, 115 to 51, as follows: YEAS. Messrs. Ashley, Babbitt, Barr, Bingham, Francis P. Blair, Samuel S. Blair, Blake, Brayton, Briggs, Buffinton, Burch, Burlingame, Burnham, Butterfield, Campbell, Carey, Carter, Case, Horace F. Clark, Cobb, Colfax, Corwin, Covode, Cox, Curtis, John G. Davis, Dawes, Delano, Duell, Dunn, Edgerton, Edwards, Elliot, Ely, Ferry, Florence, Foster, Frank, French, Gooch, Graham, Grow, Gurley, Hale, Hall, Haskin, Helmick, Hoard, Wm. Howard, Humphrey, Hutchins, Junkin, Francis W. Kellogg, Wm. Kellogg, Kenyon, Killinger, DeWitt C. Leach, Lee, Longnecker, Loomis, Maclay, Marston, McKean, McKnight, McPherson, Millward, Moorhead, Morrill, Edward Joy Morris, Isaac N. Morris, Morse, Niblack, Nixon, Olin, Palmer, Pendleton, Perry, Pettit, Phelps, Porter, Potter, Rice, Riggs, Christopher Robinson, Royce, Sedgwick, Sherman, Somes, Spaulding, Spinner, Stanton, William Stewart, Stout, Tappan, Taylor, Thayer, Theaker, Tomp kins, Train, Trimble, Vandever, Van Wyck, Verree, Wade, Walton, Cadwalader C. Washburn, Elihu B. Washburne, Israel Washburn, Wells, Windom, and Woodruff -115. NAYS-Messrs. Green Adams, William C. Anderson, Ashmore, Avery, Barksdale, Bocock, Bonham, Boyce, Brabson, Branch, Burnett, Clopton, Burton Craige, Crawford, Curry, De Jarnette, Gilmer, Hardeman, J. Morrison Harris, John T. Harris, Hatton, Houston, Jenkins, Jones, Keitt, Landrum, James M. Leach, Leake, Love, Mallory, Maynard, McQueen, Miles, Millson, Sydenham Moore, Nelson, Peyton, Quarles, Reagan, Ruffin, William Smith, William N. H. Smith, Stevenson, Stokes, Thomas, Underwood, Vance, Webster, Winslow, Woodson, and Wright-51. The nays are all from the Slave States. The Senate agreed to the report of the Conference Committee, 36 to 2-Messrs. Bragg and Pearce. The following is the bill as it was finally reported by the Conference Committee and passed both Houses: AN ACT to secure Homesteads to actual settlers on the Public Domain, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Represen tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person who is the head of a family, and a citizen of the United States, shall, from and after the passage of this act, be entitled to enter one quartersection of vacant and unappropriated public lands, or any less quantity, to be located in a body, in conformity with the legal subdivisions of the public lands, after the shall be permitted to enter more than one quarter-section or fractional quarter-section, and that in a compact body; but entries may be made at different times, under the provisions of this act; and that the Secretary of the Interior is hereby required to prepare and issue, from same shall have been surveyed, upon the following con-time to time, such rules and regulations, consistent with this act, as shall be necessary and proper to carry its provisions into effect; and that the registers and receivers of the several land offices shall be entitled to receive, upon the filing of the first affidavit, the sum of 50 cents each and a like sum upon the issuing of the final certificate, But this shall not be construed to enlarge the maximum of compensation now prescribed by law for any register or receiver: Provided, That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to impair the existing preëmption, donation, or graduation laws, or to embrace lands which have been reserved to be sold or entered at the price of $250 per acre; but no entry, under said graduation act, shall be allowed until after proof of actual settlement and cultivation or occupancy for at least three months, as provided for in Sec. 3 of the said act. ditions that the person applying for the benefit of this act shall, upon application to the register of the land-office in which he or she is about to make such entry, make affidavit before the said register or receiver of said landoffice that he or she is the head of a family, and is actually settled on the quarter-section, or other subdivision not exceeding a quarter-section, proposed to be entered, and that such application is made for his or her use and benefit, or for the use and benefit of those specially mentioned in this section, and not either directly or indirectly for the use or benefits of any other person or persons whomsoever, and that he or she has never at any previous time, had the benefit of this act; and upon making the affidavit as above required, and filing the same with the register, he or she shall thereupon be permitted to enter the quantity of land already specified: Provided, however, That no final certificate shall be given, or patent issued therefor, until the expiration oftler upon lands of the United States, which have not been five years from the date of such entry; and if, at the expiration of such time, the person making such entry, or, if he be dead, his widow, or, in case of her death, his child or children, or in case of a widow making such entry, her child or children, in case of her death, shall prove, by two credible witnesses, that he, she, or theythat is to say, some member or members of the same family-has or have erected a dwelling-house upon said land, and continued to reside upon and cultivate the same for the term of five years, and still reside upon the same (and that neither the said land or any part thereof has been alienated); then, in such case, he, she, or they, upon the payment of 25 cents per acre for the quantity entered, shall be entitled to a patent, as in other cases provided by law: And provided further, In case of the death of both father and mother, leaving a minor child or children, the right and the fee shall inure to the benefit of said minor child or children, and the guardian shall be authorized to perfect the entry for the beneficiaries, as if there had been a continued residence of the settler for five years. Provided, That nothing in this section shall be so construed as to embrace or in any way include any quarter-section or fractional quarter-section of land upon which any preëmption right has been acquired prior to the passage of this act. And provided further, That all en tries made under the provisions of this section, upon lands which have not been offered for public sale, shall be confined to and upon sections designated by odd numbers. §2. And be it further enacted, That the register of the Land Office shall note all such applications on the tract books and plats of his office, and keep a register of all such entries, and make return thereof to the General Land Office, together with the proof upon which they have been founded. §3. And be it further enacted, That no land acquired under the provisions of this act shall in any event, become liable to the satisfaction of any debt or debts until after the issuing of the patent therefor. § 4. And be it further enacted, That if, at any time after filing the affidavit, as required in the first section of this act, and before the expiration of the five years aforesaid, it shall be proved, after due notice to the settler, to the satisfaction of the register of the Land Office, that the person having filed such affidavit shall have sworn falsely in any particular, or shall have voluntarily abandoned the possession and cultivation of the said land for more than six months at any time, or sold his right under the entry, then, and in either of those events, the register shall cancel the entry, and the land so entered shall revert to the Government, and be disposed of as other public lands are now by law, subject to an appeal to the Secretary of the Interior. And in no case shall any land, the entry whereof shall have been cancelled, again be subject to occupation, or entry, or purchase, until the same shall have been reported to the General Land Office, and, by the direction of the President of the United States, again advertised and offered at public sale. § 7. And be it further enacted, That each actual set offered at public sale, upon filing his declaration or claim, as now required by law, shall be entitled to two years from the commencement of his occupation or settlement; or, if the lands have not been surveyed, two years from the receipt of the approved plat of such lands at the District Land Office, within which to complete the proofs of his said claim, and to enter and pay for the land so claimed, at minimum price of such lands; and where such settlements have already been made in good faith, the claimant shall be entitled to the said period of two years from and after the date of this act; Provided, That no claim of preëmption shall be allowed for more than 160 acres, or one-quarter section of land, nor shall any such claim be admitted under the provisions of this act, unless there shall have been at least three months of actual and continuous residence upon and cultivation of the land so claimed from the date of settlement, and proof thereof made according to law; Provided further, That any claimant under the preemption laws may take less than 160 acres by legal subdivisions; Provided further, That all persons who are preemptors, on the date of this act, shall, upon the payment to the proper authority of 624 cents per acre, if paid within two years from the passage of this act, be entitled to a patent from the Government, as now provided by the existing preëmption laws. § 8. And be it further enacted, That the 5th section of the act entitled "An act in addition to an act more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States, and for other purposes," approved the 3d of March, in the year 1857, shall extend to all oaths, affirmations, and affidavits required or authorized by this act. § 9. And be it further enacted, That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to prevent any person who has availed him or herself of the benefit of the first section of this act from paying the minimum price, or the price to which the same may have graduated, for the quantity of land so entered at any time after an actual settlement of six months, and before the expiration of the five years, and obtaining a patent therefor from the Government, as in other cases provided by law. § 10. And be it further enacted, That all lands lying within the limits of a State which have been subject to sale at private entry, and which remain unsold after the lapse of thirty years, shall be, and the same are hereby, ceded to the State in which the same may be situated; Provided, These cessions shall in no way invalidate any inceptive preëmption right or location, or any entry under this act, nor any sale or sales which may be made by the United States before the lands hereby ceded shall be certified to the State, as they are hereby required to be, under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. And provided further, That no cessions shall take effect until after the States, by legislative act, shall have assented to the same. On the 23d, the President returned the bill to the Senate with his veto, as follows: THE HOMESTEAD BILL. VETO MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT. §5. And be it further enacted, That if any person, now or hereafter, a resident of any one of the States or Territories, and not a citizen of the United States, but who at the time of making such application for the benefit of this act, shall have filed a declaration of intention, as required by the naturalization laws of the United States, and shall have become a citizen of the same before the issuing of the patent as provided for in this act, such person shall be entitled to all the rights it originated, the bill entitled An act to secure Homeconferred by this act. §6. And be it further enacted, That no individual To the Senate of the United States I return, with my objections, to the Senate, in which steads to actual settlers on the public domain and for other purposes," presented to me on the 20th instant. This bill gives to every citizen of the United States, "who is the head of a family," and to every person of foreign birth residing in the country, who has declared his intention to become a citizen, though he may not be the head of a family, the privilege of appropriating to himself one hundred and sixty acres of Government land, of settling and residing upon it for five years; and should his residence continue until the end of this period, he shall then receive a patent on the payment of twentyfive cents per acre, or one-fifth of the present Government price. During this period, the land is protected from all the debts of the settler. This bill also contains a cession to the States of all the public lands within their respective limits "which have carefully limited, but without any limitation in respect to the public lands. But I cannot so read the words "disposed of" as to make them embrace the idea of "giving away." The true meaning of words is always to be ascertained by the subject to which they are applied, and the known general intent of the lawgiver. Congress is trustee under the Constitution for the people of the United States to "dispose of" their public lands, and I think I may venture to assert with confidence that no case can be found in which a trustee in the position of Congress has been authorized to "dispose of" property by its owner, where it has ever been held that these words authorized such trustee to give away the fund intrusted to his care. No trustee, when been subject to sale at private entry, and which remain | called upon to account for the disposition of the property unsold after the lapse of thirty years." This provision embraces a present donation to the States of twelve millions two hundred and twenty-nine thousand seven hundred and thirty-one acres, and will, from time to time, transfer to them large bodies of such lands which, from peculiar circumstances, may not be absorbed by private purchase and settlement. To the actual settler, this bill does not make an absolute donation; but the price is so small that it can scarcely be called a sale. It is nominally twenty-five cents per acre; but considering this is not to be paid until the end of five years, it is, in fact, reduced to about eighteen cents per acre, or one-seventh of the present minimum price of the public lands. In regard to the States, it is an absolute and unqualified gift. I. This state of the facts raises the question whether Congress, under the Constitution, has the power to give away the public lands, either to States or individuals. On this question, I expressed a decided opinion in my message to the House of Representatives, of the 24th February, 1859, returning the agricultural college bill. This opinion remains unchanged. The argument then used applies, as a constitutional objection, with the greater force to the present bill. There it had the plea of consideration, growing out of a specific beneficial purpose; here, it is an absolute gratuity to the State without the pretext of consideration. I am compelled, for want of time, in these last hours of the session, to quote largely from this message I presume the general proposition will be admitted, that Congress does not possess the power to make donations of money, already in the Treasury, raised by taxes on the people, either to States or individuals. But it is contended that the public lands are placed upon a different footing from money raised by taxation, and that the proceeds arising from their sale are not, subject to the limitations of the Constitution, but may be appropriated or given away by Congress, at its own discretion, to States, corporations, or individuals, for any purpose they may deem expedient. The advocates of this bill attempt to sustain their position upon the language of the second clause of the third section of the fourth article of the Constitution, which declares that "the Congress shall have power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." They contend that, by a fair interpretation of the words "dispose of" in this clause, Congress possesses the power to make this gift of public lands to the States for purposes of education. It would require clear and strong evidence to induce the belief that the framers of the Constitution, after having limited the powers of Congress to certain, precise, and specific objects, intended, by employing the words "dispose of," to give that body unlimited power over the vast public domain. It would be a strange anomaly indeed, to have created two funds, the one by taxation, confined to the execution of the enumerated powers delegated to Congress, and the other from the public lands, applicable to all subjects, foreign and domestic, which Congress might designate. That this fund should be "disposed of," not to pay the debts of the United States, nor "to raise and support armies," nor "to provide and maintain a navy," nor to accomplish any one of the other great objects enumerated in the Constitution, but be diverted from them to pay the debts of the States, to educate their people, and to carry into effect any other measure of their domestic policy-this would be to confer upon Congress a vast and irresponsible authority, utterly at war with the well-known jealousy of the Federal power which prevailed at the formation of the Constitution. The natural intendment would be that, as the Constitution confined Congress to well-defined specific powers, the funds placed at their command, whether in land or money, should be appropriated to the performance of the duties corresponding with these powers. If not, a Government has been created, with all its other powers placed under his management before any judicial tribunal, would venture to present such a plea in his defense. The true meaning of these words is clearly stated by Chief Justice Taney in delivering the opinion of the Court (19 Howard, p. 436). He says, in reference to this clause of the Constitution, "It begins its enumeration of powers by that of disposing; in other words, making sale of the lands, or raising money from them, which, as we have already said, was the main object of the cession (from the States), and which is the first thing provided for in the article." It is unnecessary to refer to the history of the times to establish the known fact that this statement of the Chief Justice is perfectly well founded. That it never was intended by the framers of the Constitution that these lands should be given away by Congress is manifest from the concluding portion of the same clause. By it, Congress has power not only "to dispose of" the territory, but of the "other property of the United States." In the language of the Chief Justice (p. 437), "And the same power of making needful rules respecting the territory is in precisely the same language applied to the other property of the United States, associating the power over the territory, in this respect, with the power over movable or personal property-that is, the ships, arms, or munitions of war, which then belonged in common to the State sovereignties." The question is still clearer in regard to the public lands in the States and Territories within the Louisiana and Florida purchases. These lands were paid for out of the public Treasury from money raised by taxation. Now, if Congress had no power to appropriate the money with which these lands were purchased, is it not clear that the power over the lands is equally limited? The mere conversion of this money into land could not confer upon Congress new power over the disposition of land which they had not possessed over money. If it could, then a trustee, by changing the character of the fund intrusted to his care for special objects from money into land, might give the land away, or devote it to any purpose he thought proper, however foreign from the trust. The inference is irresistible that this land partakes of the very same character with the money paid for it, and can be devoted to no objects different from those to which the money could have been devoted. If this were not the case, then, by the purchase of a new Territory from a foreign government out of the public Treasury, Congress could enlarge their own powers, and appropriate the proceeds of the sales of the land thus purchased, at their own discretion, to other and far different objects from what they could have applied the purchase money which had been raised by taxation. II. It will prove unequal and unjust in its operation among the actual settlers themselves. The first settlers of a new country are a most meritorious class. They brave the dangers of savage warfare, suffer the privations of a frontier life, and, with the hand of toil, bring the wilderness into cultivation. The "old settlers," as they are everywhere called, are public benefactors. This class have all paid for their lands, the government price, or $1 25 per acre. They have constructed roads, established schools, and laid the foundation of prosperous Commonwealths. Is it just, is it equal, that, after they have accomplished all this by their labor, new settlers should come in among them and receive their farms at the price of twenty-five or eighteen cents per acre? Surely the old settlers, as a class, are entitled to at least equal benefits with the new. If you give the new settlers their lands for a comparatively nominal price, upon every principle of equality and justice, you will be obliged to refund out of the common Treasury the difference which the old have paid above the new settlers for their land. III. This bill will do great injustice to the old soldiers who have received land warrants for their services in fighting the battles of their country. It will greatly reduce the market value of these warrants. Already their value has sunk, tor one hundred and sixty acre warrants, to sixty-seven cents per acre, under an appre hension that such a measure as this might become a law. | tinction was an inadvertence; but, it is, nevertheless, a What price would they command, when any head of a family may take possession of a quarter section of land, and not pay for it until the end of five years, and then at the rate of only twenty-five cents per acre? The magnitude of the interest to be affected will appear in the fact that there are outstanding unsatisfied land warrants reaching back to the last war with great Britain, and even Revolutionary times, amounting in round numbers, to seven and a half millions acres. IV. This bill will prove unequal and unjust in its operation, because, from its nature, it is confined to one class of our people. It is a boon expressly conferred upon the cultivators of the soil. While it is cheerfully admitted that these are the most numerous and useful class of our fellow-citizens, and eminently deserve all the advantages which our laws have already extended to them, yet there should be no new legislation which would operate to the injury or embarrassment of the large body of respectable artisans and laborers. The mechanic who emigrates to the West, and pursues his calling, must labor long before he can purchase a quarter-section of land; while the tiller of the soil who accompanies him obtains a farm at once by the bounty of the Government. The numerous body of mechanics in our large cities cannot, even by emigrating to the West, take advantage of the provisions of this bill without entering upon a new occupation, for which their habits of life have rendered them unfit. V. This bill is unjust to the old States of the Union in many respects; and among these States, so far as the public lands are concerned, we may enumerate every State east of the Mississippi, with the exception of Wisconsin and a portion of Minnesota. It is a common belief, within their limits, that the older States of the Confederacy do not derive their proportionate benefit from the public lands. This is not a just opinion. It is doubtful whether they could be rendered more beneficial to these States under any other system than that which at present exists. Their proceeds go into the common Treasury to accomplish the objects of the Government, and in this manner all the States are benefited in just proportion. But to give this common inherit ance away would deprive the old States of their just proportion of this revenue, without holding out any, the least, corresponding advantage. While it is our common glory that the new States have become so prosperous and populous, there is no good reason why the old States should offer premiums to their own citizens to emigrate from them to the West. That land of promise presents in itself sufficient allurements to our young and enterprising citizens, without any adventitious aid. The offer of free farms would probably have a powerful effect in encouraging emigration, especially from States like Illinois, Tennessee, and Kentucky, to the west of the Mississippi, and could not fail to reduce the price of property within their limits. An individual in States thus situated would not pay its fair value for land when, by crossing the Mississippi, he could go upon the public lands, and obtain a farm almost without money and without price. VI. This bill will open one vast field for speculation. Men will not pay $1 25 for lands, when they can purchase them for one-fifth of that price. Large numbers of actual settlers will be carried out by capitalists upon agreements to give them half of the land for the improvement of the other half. This cannot be avoided. Secret agreements of this kind will be numerous. In the entry of graduated lands, the experience of the Land Office justifies this objection. VII. We ought ever to maintain the most perfect equality between native and naturalized citizens. They are equal, and ought always to remain equal, before the laws. Our laws welcome foreigners to our shores, and their rights will ever be respected. While these are the sentiments on which I have acted through life, it is not, in my opinion, expedient to proclaim to all the nations of the earth that whoever shall arrive in this country from foreign shore, and declare his intention to become a citizen, shall receive a farm of 160 acres, at a cost of 25 or 20 cents per acre, if he will only reside on it and cultivate it. The invitation extends to all; and if this bill becomes a law, we may have numerous actual settlers from China, and other Eastern nations, enjoying its benefits on the great Pacific slope. The bill makes a distinction in favor of such persons over native and naturalized citizens. When applied to such citizens, it is confined to part of the bill, VIII. The bill creates an unjust distinction between persons claiming the benefit of the preemption laws. While it reduces the price of the land to existing preëmp. tors to 62 cents per acre, and gives them a credit on this sum for two years from the present date, no matter how long they may have hitherto enjoyed the land, future preemptors will be compelled to pay double this price There is no reason or justice in this discrimi per acre. nation. IX. The effect of this bill on the public revenue must be apparent to all. Should it become a law, the reduction of the price of lands to actual settlers to 25 cents per acre with a credit of five years, and the reduction of its price to existing preëmptors to 62 cents per acre, with a credit of two years will so diminish the sale of other public lands as to render the expectation of future revenue from that source beyond the expenses of survey and management illusory. The Secretary of the Interior estimated the revenue from the public lands for the next fiscal year at $4,000,000 on the presumption that the present land system would remain unchanged. Should this bill become a law, he does not believe that $1,000,00 will be derived from this source. This bill lays the ax at the root of our present admirable land system. The public land is an inheritance of vast value to us and to our descendants. It is a resource to which we can resort in the hour of difficulty and danger. It has been managed heretofore with the greatest wisdom, under existing laws. In this management, the rights of actual settlers have been conciliated with the interests of the Government. The price to all has been reduced from $2 per acre to $1 25 for fresh lands, and the claims of actual settlers have been secured by our preëmption laws. Any man can now acquire a title in fee-simple to a homestead of 80 acres, at the minimum price of $1 25 per acre for $100. Should the present system remain, we shall derive a revenue from the public lands of $10,000,000 per annum, when the bounty land warrants are satisfied, without oppression to any human being.. In the time of war, when all other sources of revenue are seriously impaired, this will remain intact. It may become the best security for public loans hereafter, in times of difficulty and danger, as it has been heretofore. Why should we impair or destroy this system at the present moment? What necessity exists for it? The people of the United States have advanced with steady but rapid strides to their present condition of power and prosperity. They have been guided in their progress by the fixed principle of protecting the equal rights of all, whether they be rich or poor. No agrarian sentiment has ever prevailed among them. The honest poor man, by frugality and industry can, in any part of our country, acquire a competence for himself and his family, and in doing this he feels that he eats the bread of independence. He desires no charity, either from the: government or from his neighbors. This bill, which proposes to give him land at an almost nominal price, out of the property of the government, will go far to demoralize the people, and repress this noble spirit of independence. It may introduce among us those pernicious social+ theories which have proved so disastrous in other countries. JAMES BUCHANAN. WASHINGTON, June 22, 1860. In the Senate the question, Shall this bill pass notwithstanding the objections of the President? was put and lost, as follows: YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Brown, Chandler, Clark, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Fitch, Foot, Foster, Gwin, Hale, Hamlin, Harlan, King, Lane, Latham, Nicholson,, Polk, Pugh, Rice, Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, and Wilson. Republicans in Roman, 19; Democrats in Italics, 9. Total, 28. NAYS-Messrs. Bragg, Chesnut, CRITTENDEN, Davis, Fitzpatrick, Green, Hemphill, Hunter, Iverson, Johnson (Tenn.), Johnson (Ark.), Mallory, Mason, Pearce, Powell, Sebastian, Wigfall, Yulee-18. All from the South, and all Democrats, except Mr. Crittenden (Am.), of Kentucky.. such as are the heads of families; but when applicable to Several Senators were paired, which accounts persons of foreign birth recently arrived ou our shores, for the light vote. So the bill failed, not havthere is no such restriction. Such persons need not be the heads of families, provided they have filed a declara- ing received the requisite two-thirds vote necestion of intention to become citizens. Perhaps this dissary to pass it over the Executive Veto. |