Imagens das páginas

APRIL 29, 1836.]

Land Bill.


First. That prior to the proposed distribution, “ claims | 1832 I find the vote of the Senator from Tennessee rejected at the land offices have been readily allowed [Mr. WHITE] against this distribution land bill; now he by Congress.”

“Small tracts have is found voting in its favor. In 1832 I find him voting been obtained with facility.” * * " During for the amendment to increase the amount to the small the session of 1827 and 1828. Congress actually gave | States, by distributing according to the representation away to States and individuals not less than two million in the Senate and House of Representatives; now, his three hundred thousand acres of choice land.”

vote is recorded against the same proposition. In 1832 Second. That the distribution project would arrest | I find bim voting to exclude from the gross proceeds to this liberal policy to the new States, by giving to the old be distributed all expenses arising from Indian treaties, States "a direct interest in the income arising from the | Indian annuities, removals, &c.; now, I find his vote sales of the public lands"-that this measure would at recorded against the same propositions. I do not comonce check further concessions," Here the effects of plain of this. It is the necessary result of a conversion this distribution upon the new States is distinctly con to the support of this bill. Distribution and reduction ceded by the very committee which proposed the meas are the opposing principles. Reduce the price, and ure, and its adoption urged by a direct appeal to the in distribution becomes unnecessary. Distribute the proterest of the old States, and a violent denunciation of the ceeds of the sales of the public lands, and the price will new States of the Union, as influenced by “unhallowed be increased, rather than diminished. When distribudesires." Let us contrast the operations of the two tion commences, will any Senator from any old State systems, as conceded by the committee themselves:

dare vote to reduce the price of the public lands, when No distribution-effects of. /

such reduction would be “the diminution of the direct

Distribution-effects of Ist. Large donations of lands

revenue" of the State he represents? Ist. No donations hereafter.

A vote for this to individuals.

2d. None hereafter.

bill is a vote against reduction, against donations or 2d. Large donations of lands 3d. A direct interest given

pre-emptions to settlers. It is a vote to sacrifice the to new settlers.

to the old States in the income new States, for the benefit of the old States. Money, 3d. Old States holding no of public lands.

money for distribution, will be the result of this system, direct interest in sales of pub.. 4th. Rigid system hereafter and not the settlement or improvement of the new lic lands. as to all land claims.

States of the west. Sales at high prices to speculators, 4th. Private claims to lands 5th. A policy to extract from

and not to settlers, will be one of the bitter fruits of this readily allowed.

the new States most money for 5th. A liberal policy to the distribution,

measure. Eight millions of acres have passed, during new States.

the present year, into the hands of speculators, to the preA revolution in the policy of the Government as to the judice of actual settlers, and this system will be encourpublic lands has already taken place, in anticipation of

aged, because it increases the fund for distribution. And the passage of this distribution bill. In 1827 and 1828 if such are the effects in anticipation of the adoption of the Journals of the Senate and the published debates of this measure, what will be the consequences when disthat body demonstrate that a very large majority of the

1 tribution commences? I am filled with dismay and apSenate was favorable to the reduction of the price of the

prehension in contemplating the result. The new States public lands; that the measure was lost by a difference

will be treated as distant vassal colonies; they will become of opinion as to the extent of the reduction; that all to this Union what Ireland is to England, counted only seemed willing to reduce the price of the public lands / by the dollars and cents which can be extorted from the at once to one dollar an acre: and that, of the few who / people. Yes, by this bill the new States are marked as opposed a considerable reduction, several proposed an a table of profit and loss, put in the market as articles immediate cession, upon equitable terms, of all the pub- 1 of merchandise to be sold to the highest bidder, to oblic lands to the States within which they were situated. | tain money, money for distribution. Each of the old At the session of 1828, when a bill to reduce the price | States obtains "a direct interest in the income arising of the public lands was under consideration, the Journals from the sales of the public lands." State legislation and published debates show that the Senator from

will direct and control this income, and every old State Massachusetts (Mr. WEBSTER] then moved to reduce

will desire its augmentation. What will follow? Instructhe price of the public lands in favor of actual settlers tions to their representatives in Congress to repeal this to fifty cents per acre. The vote on this proposition,

law, and increase the price of the public lands. State as recorded on the Journal, was 18 for and 27 against it;

agents will be sent from every old Siate, preceding every a majority of those who voted against this proposition

public land sale, to examine the farm of every settler, voting, however, for the other proposition for a still and bid it up to the most extended value. Do not the greater reduction. Such was the situation of this ques papers in the old States, friendly to this bill, declare tion in 1828, prior to the introduction of the distribution that its passage will exempt the people of those States bill. Now, how changed the scene! All reduction of | from all taxation? The people of the new States will the price refused; the settlers of the new States denoun

be made to pay the taxes of the people of the old States ced upon this floor as unprincipled squatters; pre-emp. | by this distribution of the proceeds of the sales of the tion laws treated with scorn and derision, and specula

| public lands. Will any State Legislature of any old tors encouraged to purchase the farms of the settlers at

State dare lax their constituents, when they can avoid the public sales, and rob them of the price of their

this necessity by instructing their representatives in Conlabor. The Senator from Tennessee (Mr. WHITE] bas gress to increase their share of the income by increasing thought proper to express in his speech, in favor of this the price of the public lands? Sales will be made or distribution bill, his disapprobation of my proposition to postponed, systems established, and prices regulated, reduce to actual settlers the price of the public lands. solely with the view to augment the fund for distribuIt is far from my intention to arraign the conduct of the tiori. Experiments will be made to ascertain how much venerable Senator from Tennessee; but as he thinks my money can be drained from the people of the new States. proposition so very objectionable, may I be permitted A direct collision of interest will be created between to remind him, that before he became the advocate of the old and new States. State legislation on this subthis distribution land bill, he voted, in 1828 and in 1832, ject in the old States will be encountered by State legisas the Journals show, for a much greater reduction in lation in the new States, and our great and glorious favor of those who only promised to become actual Union subjected to imminent peril. Could I lift the settlers. (Here the Journals of 1828 and 1832 were | veil of futurity-could I array before the Senate all the produced and read, affirming the above statement.] In 1 fatal results of this measure, I am sure they would turn

Ohio TT


Land Bill.

[APRIL 29, 1836.

back from the precipice, upon the very brink of which lic Treasury would receive the remainder. And take they are now standing. In vain will they attempt to ar- the whole fund from all the lands, and the old States, rest the evil, when this bill shall have become a law. that paid scarcely a dollar of this money into the public Money-money-money for distribution will absorb all Treasury, would receive three-fourths of the whole other considerations, and bury in its engulfing vortex amount. How long could we endure the unequal opethe liberties of this now happy, happy Union. State | rations of such a system! It is buying the new States taxes will be abandoned, and the whole taxing power with ten per cent. upon the money paid by themselves. concentrated in the general Government. State officers, it is purchasing us with our own money. But then the expenses, and improvements, will be paid from the fund grant of land remains. Now it is not a donation, but a distributed by the general Government. If the land sale for a consideration. The consideration is, as stated sales furnish not a sufficient fund for distribution, in- in the act, that the proceeds of the sales of the lands crease the tariff will be the next demand. National granted are to be applied in the construction of roads defence will next be abandoned, our army disbanded, and canals, &c., which, when constructed, shall be, in and coast and frontier left defenceless. The navy will the language of the grant, “ free for the transportation next be sacrificed. Increase the surplus, will be the of the United States mail, and munitions of war, and the demand of the majority, whenever we embark in this passage of their troops, without the payment of any toll corrupting system. Why try these dangerous experi. whatever," and the grant is confined to lands subject to ments? Why create or continue a surplus? Why not ra. entry at private sale. Now, suppose the proceeds of ther reduce the tariff, reduce the price of the public the sale vested by the State in a railroad, it might so lands, and collect no more money than is required for happen that the toll relinquished by this act would have the wants of a Government economically administered? | yielded annually more than the interest upon the amount Under the surplus system, the general Government will of the proceeds of the sales of the grant. If so, the become a mere collector of money for the States, and land would have been purchased at a price equivalent we might as well disband both houses of Congress, and to its value. This grant, then, is a sale for value, and not let a majority of State Legislatures conduct all the oper. a donation. But were it a donation, how vastly uneations of this Government. No Government can long qual are the grants to the new States. The professions endure the operations of such a system. We will take of the friends of the bill are to put the new States upon the roluntary leavings of a majority of the States, when an equality as to grants of the public domain. Now ihis they shall have exhausted our revenues in expenditures bill grants to each of the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, for State purposes. It will be worse than the system of and Missouri, five hundred thousand acres, for the purrequisitions upon the States under the old confederacy, poses above mentioned; and to Indiana, one hundred and which brought this country to the brink of ruin. Never fifteen thousand two hundred and seventy-two acres; --10, never--was it intended by the framers of the con Illinois, twenty thousand acres; and Alabama, one hunstitution that we should collect vast sums for distribution dred thousand acres. Now, from document number 245, among the States. It is not among the enumerated received from the Treasury Department, it appears that powers or purposes of this Government. We can col. the grants made to the new States heretofore, for roads lect money only to conduct the operations of this Gov- and canals, were as follows: ernment, and carry into effect the powers granted to

Acres. Congress by the constitution. Were it otherwise, there is no limit to the money collecting power of this Govern


1,041,337 Indiana,

525,614 ment, and we may raise five hundred millions in a single

482,000 year for distribution. Distribution, a term unknown, a power now ungranted in the constitution, will nullify the


none Government itself. This national Government will sink



none into a mere collector of taxes and of money for distribu.

Mississippi, tion, and will soon become an object of scorn and deri



.. sion. It will be gorged by an annual surplus, to be bled! Now this bill, instead of equalizing the grants among to death by an annual distribution. For a few years it the new States, leaves Ohio considerably more than half may survive this annual operation of repletion and de- a million of acres more than Mississippi, and Indiana one pletion, but soon the vital blood will be thrown upon hundred and forty thousand eight hundred and eightythe extremities, to return no more to the central organs, six acres more than Mississippi

six acres more than Mississippi. Why this inequality!

nyt and the heart of the Government will cease to beat. Re- | Why this partiality and favoritism? Why this odiou duction is the only true remedy for a surplus revenue.

distinction between the new States in relation to this Distribution will never send back the money to those matter? Ohio and Indiana should both have less than who paid it. Reduction will leave the money in the Mississippi, for this reason—that whilst Mississippi has pockets of the people, to be used by each freeman for received nothing from this Government for the construchis own benefit, uncontrolled by any earthly power. tion of roads within her limits, these States have receiv

But we are tempted to unite in this system to sell oured five millions of dollars from the general Govern. selves to the old States, by an offer of ten per cent. ad. | ment for the construction of the great road leading to ditional on the sales of the public lands, and five hundred and through them; and this very bill perpetuates this inthousand acres. We shall be, indeed, more foolish than justice, by charging this road upon the two per cent. Esau selling his birthright for a mess of pottage, if we fund, when that fund has been ten times exhausted alaccept the offer. Why, the distribution is according to ready. Grant to Alabama and Mississippi five millions of the “last census," and Mississippi has increased, not ten dollars for roads, and more than two millions of acres in per cent., but more than one hundred per cent., since grants of land, and you will place them on an equality that period. How unequal, then, and unjust, the ratio with Ohio, and not otherwise. If, then, we are to be of distribution! But let us look at the operation of this paid a price for the surrender of the interests of the system. Let us take a single year, in which Mississippi / new States to the old States, let the price be

wbat pays into the public Treasury half a million of dollar's is paid to all the new States, and not the unjust and unefor the public lands. Under this system she would get qual propositions contained in this bill. Such proposiback ten per cent. of the nett proceeds and her dis- tions are adding insult to injury, and would be rejected tributive share--in all, about eighty thousand dollars; and with disdain by the freemen of Mississippi. But if these States that paid not a dollar of this money into the pub- 1 grants to the new States are yaluable, why are they forced


APRIL 30, 1836.]

Incendiary Publications-Smithson Legacy.


into this bill, which the President has once vetoed, Mr. L. then withdrew his motion to adjourn, at the reand which it is known he will veto again, but would quest of approve in a separate bill' which is voted down by the Mr. MORRIS, who moved that, when the Senate adfriends of distribution?

journ, it adjourn to meet on Tuesday next; the House In the message of President Jackson, placing his veto of Representatives having adjourned over to that day. upon this bill, that illustrious patriot and statesman Mr. HILL called for the yeas and nays on this motion, declared: “I deceive myself greatly if the new States which were ordered; and the question was decided in would find their interests promoted by such a system the negative by the following vote: as this bill proposes. Their true policy consists in the Yeas-Messrs. Clay, Clayton, Crittenden, Cuthbert, rapid settling and improvement of the waste lands within Ewing of Illinois, Fwing of Ohio, Goldsborough, Gruntheir limits. As a means of hastening those events, dy, Leigh, McKean, Mangum, Morris, Niles, Preston, they have long been looking to a reduction in the Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley, Swift, Tallmadge-19. price of public lands, upon the final payment of the Nays-Messrs. Benton, Black, Buchanan, Calhoun, national debt. The effect of the proposed system would Davis, Hendricks, Hill, Hubbard, Kent, King of Alabe to prevent that reduction.

bama, King of Georgia, Knight, Linn, Naudain, Nicho"I do not doubt that it is the real interest of each las, Porter, Prentiss, Robbins, Southard, Tomlinson, and all the States in the Union, and particularly of the Walker, Webster, Wbite, Wright-24. new States, that the price of these lands shall be re Mr. RUGGLES moved that when the Senate adduced and graduated; and that after they have been of journ, it adjourn to meet on Monday next. fered for a certain number of years, the refuse remain Mr. BUCHANAN opposed the motion, and called for ing unsold shall be abandoned to the States, and the the yeas and nays. They had arrived, he said, at a stage machinery of our land system entirely withdrawn.” of the session when they had but little time to spare. “ While the burdens of the East are diminishing by the They ought to act speedy on the appropriation bills, for reduction of the duties upon imports, it seems but equal which the public service was suffering. justice that the chief burden of the West should be Mr. RUGGLES's motion was negatived: Yeas 13, nays lightened in an equal degree at least.” Such is the just 29, as follows: and liberal policy recommended by the President of the YEAS --Messrs. Benton, Crittenden, Cuthbert, Ewing United States; and can any citizen of any new State

of Illinois, Goldsborough, Hendricks, McKean, Morris, doubt or hesitate as to the two propositions? The one Niles, Preston, Robinson, Ruggles, Shepley--13. system will forever prevent a reduction of the price of

NAYS-Messrs. Black, Buchanan, Calhoun, Clay, the public lands, retard their settlement, 'restrain emi Clayton, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Grundy, Hill, Hubbard, gration to the West, destroy pre-emption laws, prevent Kent, King of Alabama, King of Georgia, Knight, Leigh, donations to settlers, encourage sales to speculating mo

Linn, Naudain, Nicholas, Porter, Prentiss, Robbins, nopolists, enhance the price, by introducing secret seal Southard, Swift, Tallmadge, Tomlinson, Walker, Webed bids, prevent the surrender of the refuse lands to ster, White, Wright--29. the new States, support the State Governments of the Mr. EWING observed that, as several members would old States from money extracted from the people of the

be absent on Saturday and Monday, he would not call new States, perpetuate the surplus system, and render | up the land bill until Tuesday next. an increase of the tariff inevitable. The other system, On motion of Mr. LINN, proposed by the President, and which will ultimately The Senate adjourned. prevail if this distribution project can be defeated, will subdue the lands of the West, fill them with a race of farmers and cultivators, increase our wealth and popu.

SATURDAY, APRIL 30. lation, develop our resources, and leave this unneces.

INCENDIARY PUBLICATIONS. sary surplus in the hands of our citizens, to be used by On motion of Mr. GRUNDY, the Senate took up the each freeman to advance the welfare of himself and fam bill probibiting deputy postmasters from receiving and ily. Reduction of the revenue to the wants of the

transmitting by mail publications therein specified, in Government is our true policy. Reduce the tariff, re order to enable him to offer an amendment. duce the price of the public lands, and you will have no

Mr. GRUNDY then moved to strike out all the origisurplus for distribution; but establish the distribution nal bill, after the enacting clause, and to insert a substisystem, and you will never reduce; on the contrary, | tute, which he sent to the chair, and which was read. you will soon inevitably augment the tariff and the price

inevitably augment the tariff and the price On motion of Mr. GRUNDY, the amendment was orof the public lands. In sustaining distribution, I would dered to be printed; and the bill was laid on the table. oppose reduction, for they are opposing principles. In sustaining distribution, I would oppose pre-emptions and

SMITHSON LEGACY. donations to settlers, encourage monopolies by specula. On motion of Mr. PRESTON, the Senate took up the tors of the public lands, and introduce the system of se- bill authorizing the President of the United States to cret sealed bids, by which we are threatened by the appoint an agent or agents to prosecute and receive committee which reported this bill. And, finally, in from the British court of chancery the legacy bequeathed supporting distribution, I would sustain the tariff, and to the United States by the late James Smithson of Lonrender its augmentation inevitable, and a consequent don, for the purpose of establishing at Washington city depression of the price of our great staple. These are an institution for the increase of knowledge among men, my views upon this important subject, and I thank the to be called the Smithsonian University. Senate for their indulgent attention to my remarks upon Mr. P. said that by this will it was intended that this this question.

Government should become the beneficiaries of this When Mr. WALKER had concluded,

| legacy, and contended that if they had not the competence The bill was, by general consent, laid on the table. to receive it by the constitution, the act of no individual

Mr. LINN rose to move that the Senate adjourn. He could confer the power on them to do so. He claimed had no disposition, he said, to delay the vote on the land that they had not the power to receive the money for bill, but he hoped it would not be taken before Tues national objects, and, if so, the expending it for another day. The state of the northwestern frontier was such, object was a still higher power. He controverted the that he wished to know what Congress would do for its position that if they could not receive it as the beneficiary protection, before the vote on the land bill was taken. I legatee, they might receive it as the fiduciary agent. if SENATE.]

Smithson Legacy.

[APRIL 30, 1836.

they had not the power to establish a university without District over which Congress was guardian; and he had the power conferred on them by a grant, they could not therefore no difficulty in voting for the bill. have it with the grant; or what they could not exercise Mr. PRESTON was aware of the decision of the Sudirectly, they could not exercise as trustee. He referred preme Court cited by the Senator from Virginia, (Mr. to a report made by Mr. Adams in the House of Repre LEIGH,] that the people of this District might be taxed sentatives, in which the genealogy of Mr. Smithson was without representation; and he had no doubt that these given and traced through the line of the illustrious corporations could exercise a trust. But this was not a Percys and Seymours of England. He thought this do- trust to the city of Washington. The United States was nation bad been partly made with a view to immortalize the cestuy que trust, and not the city of Washington. the donor, and that it was too cheap a way of conferring the corporation of the city of Washington could not immortality. There was danger of their imaginations enforce this claim in a court of chancery in England. being run away with by the associations of Chevy Chase If an institution of the kind was desired, he would prefer ballads, &c.; and he had no idea of this District being it to be established out of our own funds, and not have used as a fulcrum to raise foreigners to immortality by Congress pander to the paltry vanity of any individual. getting Congress, as the parens patriæ of the District of if they accepted this donation, every whippersnapper Columbia, to accept donations from them.

vagabond that had been traducing our country might The committee had misconceived the facts: the be-think proper to have his name distinguished in the same quest was to the United States of America to found a way. It was not consistent with the dignity of the university in the District of Columbia, under the title of country to accept even the grant of a man of noble birth the " Smithsonian University;" and the execution of the or lineage. terms of the legacy was to redound to the purposes of Mr. CLAYTON said, the Senator from South Carolina the donation, wbich was for the benefit of all mankind.

of all mankind. (Mr. Calhoun) had considered this as a donation to the its terms, and not limited to the Dis. United States. It was not so. The United States was trict of Columbia; it was for the benefit of the United merely named in the will as the trustee, and was to States, and could not be received by Congress

receive no benefit whatever. It was merely a charitable Mr. LEIGH said he would thank the gentleman to object to establish a university in the District of Columinform the Senate that the report he had referred to was bia. They had established similar institutions within the made in the House of Representatives, and not by a District of Columbia, by acts of Congress, and no one committee of the Senate. The report of the Senate's doubted the power to permit persons from other places committee was simply a statement of matters of fact. to be educated in them. Mr. L. explained the provisions of the will, which were Mr. CALHOUN said, if bis memory'served him, there simply these: The testator, James Smithson, bequeath-was opposition made to the passage of those acts. ed to his nephew, James Henry Hungerford, a legacy Mr. CLAYTON said he believed there was some obof one hundred thousand pounds sterling; providing, thatjection made to the policy, but not to the power, of if Mr. Hungerford should die without children, the making the donation. It was to be located in the city of legacy should enure to the United States, for the pur- Washington, and persons in this city would be more benpose of founding, at the city of Washington, an institu- efited by it than any others. tion for the increase of knowledge among men, to be Mr. CALHOUN was of opinion that this donation was called the Smithsonian University; and the Government made expressly to the United States. By reading the had received information from the American consul at l terms in which the bequest was made, it was impossible London that Mr. Hungersord had lately died without to conceive otherwise. The bequest was "to the United ever having been married, and without leaving any | States of America, for the purpose of establishing, at children. it now became necessary, Mr. L. said, for the city of Washington, an institution for the increase of Congress to determine whether it was competent for the knowledge among men.” Now, take out the words “the United States to receive this money; and if they should city of Wasbington," and the donation was clearly to the receive it, to take measures for carrying the intentions United States. The words the city of Washington,” of the testator into effect. The committee to whom were only used to designate the place where the univerthis subject had been referred were all of opinion, with sity was to be established, and not by any stretch of the the exception of the gentleman from South Carolina, meaning of language to be considered as making the [Mr. PRESTON,] that it was proper for the United States donation to the city. He understood the Senators, on to receive this money. They had not considered the all hands, to agree that it was not in the power of Conquestion at all, whether it was in the power of Congress gress to establish a national university, and they all agreed to establish a national university; nor was it necessary that they could establish a university in the District of they should do so. They looked upon this bequest as Columbia. Now, on this principle, they could not rehaving been made simply for the benefit of one of the ceive the bequest; for the District of Columbia was not cities of the District of Columbia, of which Congress was even named in it: the city of Washington being only the constitutional guardian, and could receive and apply designated as the place where the university was to be the money in that form. Congress was the parens patriæ established, and the bequest being expressly made to of the District of Columbia, in the sense laid down by the United States. He thought that acting under this Blackstone; a power which necessarily belonged to every legacy would be as much the establishment of a national Government, and could therefore very properly receive university, as if they appropriated money for the purthis trust for a charitable purpose in the District of pose; and he would indeed much rather appropriate the Columbia. Congress had in fact exercised this power money, for he thought it was beneath the dignity of the of parens patriæ of the District in the establishment of United States to receive presents of this kind from any an orphans' court, in the erection and support of a peni one. He could never pass through the rotundo of the tentiary, and could create an establishment to take care Capitol without having his feelings outraged by seeing of lunatics; and, indeed, if it did not possess this power, that statue of Mr. Jefferson, which had been placed there in what a deplorable condition would this District be. I contrary to their consent. The States of Maryland and Virginia undoubtedly pos. Mr. SOUTHARD said that the Senator from South sessed this power, and of course Congress derived it, as Carolina was mistaken in saying that every Senator to the District, from their deeds of cession. He did not agreed that it was not in the power of Congress to estab. look upon this legacy to be for the benefit of the United lish a national university. He, for one, believed that States, but for the benefit of one of the cities of the Congress had the unquestionable right to do so. This,

Mar 2, 1836.]

Foreign Paupers.


however, did not involve the constitutionality of the ed, he would establish it in one of the Territories. He question before them; as, in his opinion, the most rigid deemed the establishment of institutions for the diffusion construction of the constitution would not be adverse of knowledge a vital principle of a republican Governto the bill. Congress had the same right to establishment. They might as well say that delivering lectures this university that they had to charter a college in in any of the sciences was a national institution, as to call Georgetown or Alexandria.

this one. Mr. BUCHANAN believed that Congress had the Mr. PRESTON said the declaration of the Senator power to receive and apply this money to the purposes from New Jersey (Mr. SOUTHARD] had satisfied him that intended by the testator, without involving the question this was a national university. There was no difference whether they had the power to establish a national uni between a university in the District of Columbia for the versity or not. There was no question but that James benefit of all mankind and a national university. That Smithson, in his lifetime, had a right to establish a uni Senator had not distinguished between the power of versity at the city of Washington, and call it the Smith- erecting buildings and the use to which they were approsonian University; or a national university, if he pleased; priated. They had the power to erect buildings in loco and Congress, by receiving and applying this bequest, parentis patriæ for the benefit of the District of Colum. would only act as the trustee of the city of Washington, bia; they might erect buildings for the maintenance of for whose benefit it was made.

paupers of the District; but if the people of the District, Mr. WALKER would not discuss the question wheth in this case, were to have any benefit peculiar to the place, er this was a national university, because he believed it was in the erection of the buildings alone. He asked that question was not involved. But he should vote for if the buildings of the Post Office Department were the bill, on the ground that Congress would be doing | erected by Congress as the parens patria of the District manifest injustice to the citizens of the city of Washing of Columbia? Had they the right, as parens patriæ of ton by refusing to accept the donation. It was true that the District of Columbia, to erect this building for the it operated for the benefit of all mankind, but not more benefit humani generis of this District, when in fact it so than a university established at Princeton or any other was a general charity to mankind, including the conplace. The Senator from South Carolina (Mr. CALHOUNT | federacy, and not confined to the District of Columbia? had said they ought to read the will as if the words "at He was against the power, and would be against the Washington" were left out. He (Mr. W.) did not think policy, if they had the power, 50; they ought to read it just as it was, in connexion with. After some further remarks from Messrs. LEIGH the whole, and give it its true construction, which was, and PRESTON, the question was taken on ordering the that the United States was only designated as the trustee, bill to be engrossed for a third reading, and decided in and the people of the city of Washington had a right to the affirmative: Yeas 31, nays 7, as follows: call upon Congress, as the representatives of the United Yeas-Messrs. Benton, Black, Buchanan, Clay, ClayStates, to execute the trust. '

ton, Crittenden, Cuthbert, Davis, Ewing of Ohio, Golds. Mr. DAVIS said this man, Smithson, it was said, bad borough, Grundy, Hendricks, Hubbard, Kent, King of devised one hundred thousand pounds sterling for the Alabama, Knight, Leigh, Linn, Mangum, Moore, Nauestablishment of a university in the city of Washington dain, Nicholas, Porter, Prentiss, Rives, Robbins, Southto diffuse knowledge among men. It seemed to be taken ard, Swift, Tallmadge, Tomlinson, Walker-31. for granted that it was for the establishment of a univer Nays-Messrs. Calhoun, Ewing of Illinois, Hill, King sity, although he believed the word university was not of Georgia, Preston, Robinson, White--7. to be found in the will. He could not infer why it was The Senate then adjourned. so construed, as there were other means of diffusing knowledge among men besides doing it through the

MONDAY, MAY 2.. medium of universities, and he therefore thought the discussion, as to the particular design of the gift, prema

FOREIGN PAUPERS. ture. He did not regard it as a gift or bequest to the Mr. DAVIS presented the following resolution, adopt. Government. If he did, he would bave all the feelingsed by the Legislature of Massachusetts: evinced by the Senator from South Carolina, (Mr. PRES Resolved, That it is expedient to instruct our Senators TON.] The testator had not specified what special pur- and request our Representatives in Congress to use their pose it was to be applied to, nor when the fund was to endeavors to obtain the passage of a law to prevent the be used; and Congress might defer using it until it be- introduction of foreign paupers into this country, and to came large enough to be used advantageously to the favor any other measures which Congress may be dispurposes of diffusing knowledge among mankind. If posed to adopt to effect this object. they denied the right to establish a university, they de Mr. DAVIS said he feared that the resolve would not nied the right to establish all institutions of charity. be fully understood in all parts of the country, and The same question involved in this was also involved in would therefore take leave to offer some explanation of the incorporation of institutions which had been incorpo- the reasons which had probably induced the Legislature rated by them in this District. The only question now to act upon the subject. He need not say it was importunder consideration was, whether they should receive ant, as, otherwise, it would not be presented here in this money. He would vote for it, and, if they could this form. If he did not mistake the signs of the times, not devise some appropriate disposition of it after it was the wrongs which had been inflicted on Massachusetts received, he would be willing to send it back by the first would soon reach other places, and the country would return packet.

participate in her sentiments. Mr. CALHOUN asked the Senator from Massachu It is well known (said Mr. D.) that pauperism in Eusetts (Mr. Davis] what construction he would put upon rope has become a great and oppressive burden. In the will, if the words “at Washington" had been left England, especially, it has become so powerful in numout of it.

bers and physical power as to be, in some districts, alMr. DAVIS replied that he would put the same con most uncontrollable. The number had not, to his struction on it then as he did now.' His first inquiry knowledge, been accurately ascertained; but the means would be whether it was for a charitable purpose; and, were at hand to prove that the aggregate and power if there was no power to establish the institution in any were great and oppressive. It appeared, from parliaof the States, he would establish it in the District of mentary documents, that, in 1818, the sums expended Columbia; and if the power to establish it there was doubt- | by the parishes in England and Wales alone, where

Vol. XII.--87

« AnteriorContinuar »