JAN. 13, 1829 ]

TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 1829.

The House again resumed the consideration of the Tennessee Land Bill-the question being on the amendment moved by Mr. CROCKETT, as a substitute for the bill, as modified on the suggestion of Mr. POLK.

Mr. BLAIR rose, and said that he had refrained from saying any thing on this measure, when it was under consideration and discussion on former occasions, because of the interest which his colleagues had manifested, and also the fact that they had explained satisfactorily the object and end of the memorial of the Legislature of his State; and he would have contented himself at this time by giving a silent vote, but for the unjustifiable attempts which had been made to drive it from the House, by a kind of side wind, not only jeoparding the measure, but tarnishing the purity of legislation in his native State. Under such circumstances, silence, on his part, might (by his constituents) be construed into a criminal indifference to the object, and a total disregard to the character of the State. This, subject, though so fully discussed, seemed yet to be grossly misunderstood by one of the gentlemen whose opinions had been expressed in the course of the debate, and, doubtless, by many others who had not participated therein. It should be his purpose, if he could receive-what had but seldom been awarded to the speaker -the attention of the House, to present the claim of Tennessee in its proper light, whilst he should expose the demerits of each and every proposition which had been made, in amendment of the original bill.

But, [Mr. B. said] before he would proceed to the subject, he would give a passing notice to the statements and opinions of some gentlemen who had expressed their preference for the amendment of his colleague. A gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. BUCKNER] informs us that his opposition to the original bill was recorded at the last session, but that he intends to support the proposed amendment, because he prefers to give the lands in Tennessee to occupants rather than to the State: and that he can see no good reason for doing indirectly what this House has the power to do directly. This is a mistake into which, I fear, many have fallen. The State of Tennessee has never assumed, before this House, the character of a suppliant, asking for favors. As one of its Representatives, I ask the performance of your contract, (if not yours, your predecessors) solemnly entered into, and which has never been realized. But on this subject I shall have occasion, hereafter, to speak more at large. A member from North Carolina [Mr. CULPEPER] said that he would vote to give the lands to the occupants, rather than to the State, because they [the occupants] "had risked their lives in taking possession of their lands, and had encountered privations incident to the settlement of all new countries." Mr. B. said that he had not expected to hear such arguments in favor of the proposition from the members from the State from whence that gentleman came, and he felt himself constrained to say, that it evinced such profound ignorance of the history of the landed system in North Carolina and Tennessee, and such an ill-timed display of benevolence for a part of the good people of Tennessee, that he feared that it arose from the consideration that they were the minority, and that, by extending his offices of kindness to them, he would thwart the views of the majority, and disappoint the expectations of the delegation on this floor.

Mr. B. said he could not but remind the member that the citizens of the district which he [Mr. B.] now represented, once deserved the character of hardy adventurers, "who risked their lives in quest of their homes" they were the descendants of the good people of the gentleman's own State, and went out under the auspices of that respectable State. Did the gentleman at that time feel differently from what he now does? Then, the mother

[H. OF R

State, clothed with parental kindness, said to the occupants who invaded the Indian territory, with the rifle in the one hand and Jacob's staff in the other, you shall have a preference of entry, or pre-emption in purchase, for the improvements which you have thus made, and which were emphatically "at the risk of life, and under all the privations incident to new settlements." That was viewed as an act of great kindness, though the settlers were the holders of military warrants, and had fought in the Revolutionary struggle. [Here Mr. CARSON said, that many of his friends supposed allusion had been made to him, which he did not believe, himself, but asked an explana tion. To which Mr. B. replied, that he had no reference to that gentleman; his allusion was to the member in his eye, who had assigned his reason for supporting the amendment of his colleague, a day or two since.] A word as to the circumstances under which possession was taken of the country, in which the lands now in question lie. In 1818, the Chickasaw Indians ceded the lands within the limits of Tennessee to the General Government; that land had been used by them as a hunting ground; after the treaty they abandoned it. Tennessee sent its surveyors and sectioned the whole country; it was thrown open to the North Carolina warrant holders, who took up the choice of the country; and the residue has been possessed by the occupants. Sir, said Mr. B. no people ever have settled upon the public domain under circumstances less adverse.

We

A gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. LOCKE] has given us the second edition of his last year's speech against the measure, and as my friend and colleague [Mr. POLK] then gave a full and perfect answer to it, I will not delay the time of the House, but refer you to the newspapers for speech and answer. The gentleman, however, has so far enlarged as to say, that the zeal of the Tennesssee delegation on this subject induces the belief, that the land is more valuable than they had represented it to be. [said Mr. B.] of that delegation are peculiarly circumstanced; if we fold our arms and sit in silence, we are doomed to hear opprobrium cast upon the state; if we reply, we are obnoxious to the charge of over anxiety.and intemperate zeal; whether or not the gentleman can commend my zeal, I can assure him of one fact, that, when the character of my native State is impugned, I care not where, or by whom, I, for one, will not be found witnessing submissively the work of detraction.

A member from Ohio [Mr. WOODS] has thought proper, in a second speech, to speak again with freedom in relation to the impurity of the legislation of my native State. Had the member been led into these remarks on the spur of the occasion, and in the heat of debate, some palliation might have been offered; but, after having been admonished by my friend and colleague, [Mr. POLK] on a former day, of the total destitution of truth in his remarks; after sleeping upon his calumnies: he has thought fit again to reiterate them; and, what is still more unkind, compliments my colleague, [Mr. CROCKETT] as the author of his precious information. Mr. B. said that it mattered not to him from whence the information was received; he felt himself bound to say that there was no foundation for the charge of fraud or impurity against his native State; and he could not believe that his colleague had made such communication to the member.

Mr. B. said he would now come to the subject which he believed to be the proper theme of discussion-he meant the right of Tennessee to the surplus lands within its limits, for the purpose of making good the deficit in the school fund. He would inquire, what had been asked; what the House had done; and what was now attempted? The Legislature of Tennessee, some four or five years ago, memorialized Congress, and instructed the Senators, and requested the Representatives from the State to use their influence to obtain a cession of the vacant residuum of lands within the State, after the satisfaction of all the North Caroli

land claims, and for agents sent to North Carolina, to procure copies of the books in the Executive office of that State; and for what? I answer, from the confident hope that there would be a realization of some benefit to her, or to the literary institutions of the State, after satisfaction of all the claims of North Carolina upon that territory-a hope that, from the surplus lands, over which her care was to be extended, a fund would be raised to gladden the poor man's heart, by seeing the clouds of ignorance and error dissipated from the mind of his offspring, under the genial influence of the rays of education, which had measurably been obscured in their lonely retreat. In this way, and this alone, could he account for the labors performed, and expenses incurred by his native State, when, for many years, these burthens were sustained by the district, the citizens of which his colleague and himself represented. If he was correct in saying that all the North Carolina claims were first to be satisfied, and in satisfying them school lands were to have been laid off for each six miles square, he would put a plain question to the House. Suppose, in the exercise of great good feeling towards the occupants in the Western district of Tennessee, you should give away the fund which was provided for the satisfaction of the claims before specified, what think you would be the next application? Surely it would be to you, both on the part of North Carolina and Tennessee, to discharge their respective claims. Will you, then, divest yourselves of the means of paying your debts, and exercise generosity at the expense of justice?

We have been told by the member from Ohio [Mr. WOODS], that Tennessee has seized upon more of the public lands than any other three States in this Union-that the Cherokee purchase has been sold for seven hundred thousand dollars, and the proceeds have been put into the State Treasury. "Mark how a plain tale will put down such an unfounded statement." To those who have been at all conversant with the state of things which existed during the mania which pervaded the purchasers of the public lands, I need only say, that Tennessee, too, had contracted the malady; lands were sold for more than their value, and for sums which the purchasers never calculated upon paying. But suppose the sum stated by the member had actually been received, [which I presently will show was not the fact,] are we to be debited with the proceeds of the sales of our own lands? I say our own, because the General Government surrendered the Cherokee conntry, being north and east of the reservation line," to Tennessee, and in the same act of surrender, exempted that section of the country from the operation of the warrant holders. Tennessee claimed, whether rightfully or not I will not inquire, the sovereignty over the lands taken from the Cherokee Indians, in consequence of the wars into which she had been driven with that tribe, and in consequence of having expelled them from that part of the country. Under this claim, a compromise took place between the General Government and Tennessee, in which, as before stated, all north and east of the line before described the warrant holder was restricted to the balance of the country, and was forbidden to enter the Cherokee lands with a claim which, above all others, (had it not been for that adjustment,) was entitled to full and prompt satisfaction. Under this arrangement, the warrant holder was postponed in the receipt of his meritorious claim from year to year, until the purchase of the country in which the lands now in question are situate, was made from the Chickasaw Indians. Has it ever been said, by any one, that the warrant holder, or any other claimant under North Carolina or the General Government, had a right to an acre of the Cherokee lands? Never. Did not Congress, in 1823, repeal the condition upon which the cession of the lands, north and east of the line, was made, so far as regarded the price at which Tennessee should sell said lands, and give consent that she

[H. OF R.

should dispose of the lands belonging to her at a less price than the minimum price of the lands of the General Government? Does not this conclusively show the recognition of the act of cession to Tennessee? I will now call the attention of the House to a fact which must, in itself, be conclusive to the unprejudiced mind: In the identical act in which the surrender and exemption of the Cherokee lands is to be found, Congress provides for the satisfaction of the claims of North Carolina, south and west. This is not all: in that act in which the surrender is made, are the lands given to each of the literary institutions of the State, as well as to common schools. But suppose that he [Mr. BLAIR] should enter into the business of taking an account with the astute member from Ohio, with that strictness which characterizes the proceedings of a master in chancery, and debit the State of Tennessee with the proceeds of the sales of her own lands; he entertained no doubt but that there would be near a million of dollars due to the State. Were he to enter upon the subject, he would make such an estimate as this:

There are about twenty-five millions of acres of land within the State; the one thirty-sixth part of which, (being six hundred and forty acres to each six miles square, would amount to seven hundred thousand acres; at two dollars, the minimum price is $1,400,000

Deduct twenty-two thousand acres, reserved, at two dollars,

Then deduct the price of sales of the lands, one-fourth paid in of first sale, of four hundred and sixty thousand dollars, is Do. from late entries, Probable receipts hereafter,

44,000 $1,356,000

$116,000 270,000 171,000

557,000

$799,000

Due Tennessee,

This calculation is based upon the minimum price of the public lands. Need I inform this House of the fact, that we have few, if any, of our lands which, if taken as the school lands, were directed under the cession act, that would not be worth more than five dollars per acre at this time. But the member says there are yet one million of acres of land to dispose of in the Cherokee country. If he alludes to that to which the Indian claim has been extinquished, I can inform him that the remaining lands are now refused at one cent per acre, and probably never will be enteredat all events, not for any other purpose than that of timber. If to the lands yet in possession of the Cherokees, I can assure him that, instead of a million acres, there is not more than the contents of an ordinary county-he meant within the chartered limits of Tennessee. Can the gentleman's ideas of right be such as to palm upon the school fund of Tennessee lands worth less than one cent-worth nothing in most instances-instead of the choice lands which were intended to be given? In the catalogue of benefits conferred by the General Government upon the State of Tennessee, the member gives to us the annuities paid to Indians within the State. Tennessee never asked for them. It was a component part of the mistaken policy of the General Government in relation to that unfortunate people, done without the request of Tennessee, and for the purpose of keeping them as an incubus hanging upon the State, without its consent. I protest against such items being charged against us in the enumeration of benefits; they are curses sent us in disguise, by such politicians as the member from Ohio, to which I can give no name more appropriate than that of false philanthropy.

The member has had the boldness or folly, when speaking of the legislation of North Carolina and Tennessee in relation to the University warrants, to say, that as well might they have issued warrants to Pharaoh's host as to the

University." I had thought that the abstruse doctrine of escheats required profound judgment, and thorough investigation, in order to fathom it; but the capacious mind of the member has, at one glance, encompassed all the legislation of both States on that subject, and has affixed upon it the seal of ignorance or turpitude. Let us examine the subject, and see if the member has not evinced his entire lack of knowledge on that point. At the time of the cession, North Carolina reserved the right to issue warrants and perfect titles to the officers and soldiers of her line. The United States did, or might have known, the extent of that incumbrance, by consulting the muster rolls, to which access might have been had. According to the provisions of the law of North Carolina, previous to the act of cession, the University of that State was entitled to the estates of all its citizens who should die without heirs; this was an incumbrance imposed on the ceded territory, and was known to the contracting parties, and was, therefore, just. The claim being just in its origin (as against the General Government) still continues to be so, and the only question is, as to the rightful claimant of that demand. There has never been, to my knowledge, a doubt existing in the mind of any jurist as to the validity of the claim, as against the United States. True, the State of Tennessee did protest against the proceeds of the escheat warrants being appropriated by North Carolina, and contended that the estate rightfully belonged to the sovereignty within whose limits it lay; that the transfer of sovereignty by North Carolina over that portion of her territory, now the State of Tennessee, necessarily drew with it all concomitants, and upon the appropriation of the claim, within the limits of her territory, the right immediately attached. Now, [said Mr. B.] if the gentleman from Ohio cannot see how this question could become the subject of negotiation and adjustment between the two States, without just imputation of fraud, he felt very confident that others could.

The member from Ohio has also discovered mal-administration in the State of Tennessee, in regard to the acts of limitation so frequently passed and repealed. After informing the gentleman that the time within which North Carolina should present her claims, chargeable upon the ceded territory, was illimitable, need he inform him that, notwithstanding the ruinous consequences resulting from the great contrariety of interests and feelings within the State of Tennessee, in relation to the public lands, yet there being no time limited in the act of cession for the prevention of North Carolina claims, that there was imposed upon Tennessee a moral obligation to repeal any act unadvisedly made in violation of the compact of cession, more especially when delay had arisen from legal disability having attached to the person on whom the claim had been cast

The State of Tennessee has been onerated with burthens which could not have attached but for the oversight in the act of cession to which he had just referred. Kentucky stood in somewhat similar circumstances towards Virginia, but the limitation was fixed at three years; consequently, after the expiration of that time, she became possessed of the remainder of the lands within her limits; but Tennessee had borne all the incumbrances which he had mentioned in the progress of his remarks, and was now tantalized with a recitation of mock benefits, when she asks you to do what you have in your power to do, and what, if left undone, can, in no possible event, enure to the benefit of the Union, or the increase of the Treasury. He therefore said, that he felt himself bound to sustain the original bill, and vote against each and every amendment which had been proposed. He respected the request of the Legislature of his State, thinking with that body as respected the subject now under consideration. He meant to act in conformity to their recommendation, even so far as to vote against the bill as amended by the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. WICKLIFFE.] He took the broad ground that, whilst he would do as much as had ever been

[JAN. 13, 1829.

done in this country to favor occupants, he would not, by his vote, go so far as to give to them that which did not belong to him. He was not sent here to indulge in acts of humanity and benevolence, nor could he do so on any other basis than his individual resources.

Mr. B. said that, when he gave a vote which should be used thereafter as an entering wedge to the gifting away the public domain, it should be placed upon a broader and more liberal ground; his liberality should be co-extensive with the poor of the Union; it should embrace the poor in each of their districts, as well as his own. He was in favor of giving to those whose only claim was founded upon violations of law, (he meant the settlers upon this as well as all the other public lands) the right of pre-emption; beyond that he would not go. And as the bill, as amended by his friend from Kentucky, [Mr. WICKLIFFE] goes boyond that in its provisions, he felt himself constrained to vote against it. The remarks which he had made would, in some measure, apply to the proposition intended to be submitted by his colleague, [Mr. BELL] as it was also a departure from the course demarked by the legislative recommendation.

Mr. B. concluded by tendering his thanks to the House for its patient and polite attention.

Mr. ISACKS said he had not heretofore taken any part in the debate on this subject. He would not now do it, if silence might not be construed into indifference to the interest of the State which he in part represented. I will not [said Mr. I ] occupy the attention of the House with constructions of cessions and compacts, and the history of legislation growing out of them, in North Carolina and Tennessee; enough has been said already to maintain, as far as all that can go, the ground taken in support of this bill. I will content myself with presenting one plain view of the subject, which others may have overlooked. I submit to the House this direct and simple inquiry: In the present situation of this land, what is it likely to be worth to the United States? It must be answered, if it remains as it is, it can be worth nothing. Will you be at the expense of surveying, selling, and making titles to it? Will it pay cost, and yield a profit over, which will be worth the experiment? The United States can't dispose of it without establishing a land office there; a Register and Receiver must be appointed, and a Surveyor, with salaries, such as are given to the like officers elsewhere: for these, under our system of land laws, are salary officers. A Register and Receiver get, each, besides commissions on sales, five hundred dollars a year. The Surveyor, besides compensation per mile, two thousand dollars.

The United States cannot establish and keep there the necessary machinery for the appropriation of these lands, at an expense short of five thousand dollars per annum. And then, how are the public lands of the Government disposed of? Not an acre of it can, under the existing laws, be sold, either at public or private sale, for less than one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre. Does any man, from the general but faithful account given of the quality of the land, believe that there is any part of it that would ever sell at that price? If he does, he is certainly much mistaken, as I will show. You may expose your land there to public sale; your crier may cry himself to death; you may continue your land office; and in fifty years you cannot sell land enough to pay the expense of one year: for the plainest of all reasons-the land is not worth the price you set upon it. Whenever this subject has been before the House, some gentlemen have shown much sensibility, and expressed great concern, lest Congress should relinquish to Tennessee property of great value if retained. If gentlemen think so, how is it that no one of them has ever submitted a proposition to have the necessary offices established, and the duties performed, by which the Government could realize the value which, in argument, had been attached to the lands? Why