remarks in reply. He wished this subject stripped of all extraneous matter, and of all other considerations than those which rightfully belonged to it. How, then, does the matter stand? The gentlemen who advocate_the bill say that it is no gratuity. They say that every officer was entitled to his half pay for life, and that the commutation was forced upon them, they never having consented to it, except in some instances; and that the compact was not fulfilled by that act. But, said Mr. C. I contend that the compact has been fulfilled by the acceptance of the commutation offered, and that no further claim exists. If they contend that there is an equitable title, then, I say, that the heirs of such as accepted the terms, and who have since died, are equally entitled to the sum now proposed to be paid. He never knew that the death of the creditor destroyed the debt, and he believed it was equally binding in one case as the other. If the bill were to pass in its present form, it would be partial in the

extreme.

The gentleman from Ohio had read several letters from General Washington, to show that he considered these individuals to have a claim on the Government. But, if General Washington was of that opinion, would he not have acted under it? I ask, said Mr. C. in what instance General Washington, who was always the soldier's friend, came forward and stated that the Government owed these officers any thing which had not been paid? He never did; and, therefore, the conclusion was a fair one, that he did not consider that they were entitled to any thing, and that their compact had been fulfilled. He [Mr. C.] did not doubt that such was his opinion.

These officers were certainly entitled to great respect, and to the gratitude of the country; and no man more cheerfully awarded them than Mr. C.; but he did not wish to be carried away by his feelings. He desired to do justice. If the country owed them any thing, let it be paid to the utmost farthing. He wished their claim, however, to be satisfactorily established, in the first place. Far from feeling any hostility towards these applicants, he was induced by many considerations to feel favorably disposed towards them. His early associations led him to look with great respect upon the patriots of the Revolution, as he lost his father in that struggle, who, although not on the continental establishment, was no less a patriot.

Mr. PARRIS remarked that, unless provision were made for the soldiers of the ranks, as well as the officers, he should not vote for the bill. The sufferings of both were equal-there was no difference in their privations, and the same provisions ought to be extended to both. He, therefore, proposed to recommit the bill for the purpose of adding an amendment; which he read. [This amendment was pronounced, on the next day, to be out of order.]

[SENATE.

had once reported upon the subject for which they were appointed, they became defunct, and had no longer pow. er to act upon it.

The CHAIR corrected Mr. W. The committee were not discharged from acting upon the bill until it should have been disposed of.

Mr. PARRIS said that the proposition of the gentleman from New Hampshire did not reach his object. He wished that the amounts due to the soldiers should be ascer tained by the committee. It was not possible for him [Mr. P.] to draw a section that should embrace the amount of the depreciation which they suffered. As he could not frame an amendment which would comprise all his objects, he desired the recommittal of the bill. Mr. FOOT thought that, to fill the blank with a certain sum in the present state of the question, would operate to exclude all other amounts. He was of opinion that the extent and number of the objects to which this bill was to apply, ought first to be settled, and then the sum proposed to fill the blank could be fixed upon with precision.

Mr. WOODBURY observed that another and perhaps a better method to reach the object, would be, by a se. parate appropriation. The only question now is, will we pay the sum which has been proposed to the officers of the Revolution? And this question, he thought, stood entirely separate from any other class of individuals. Appropriations for other objects could be made in additional sections, after the blank in the first section had been filled.

Mr. FOOT believed that, if the blank were filled, it would prevent provisions from being made for any other class of claimants. As to the ground on which the chairman had rested these claims, he was of opinion that, if it was a good ground, the legal representatives had the same claim to relief as the surviving officers. He therefore hoped that a recommittal might be had, and that the consi deration of the bill might be deferred, that they might see what amendments the committee would see fit to propose. Mr. BERRIEN thought the delay proposed would operate unjustly and injuriously upon the prospects of the bill. Let us, said Mr. B., look at the circumstances under which this measure stands. The committee was appointed to inquire into the merits of these claims. They have done so; and the bill is now in a fair train of debate and examination. It is proposed, at this juncture, to recommit the bill-and for what? Why, because it may influence the vote of some gentlemen, by giving a pledge to provide for another class of claimants.

But, said Mr. B., supposing the blank to be filled with the sum now proposed. Are gentlemen pledged by their vote on this question Can they not afterwards bring forward their amendments, and should they fail of obtaining their adoption, may they not vote against the Mr. VAN BUREN said he hoped the bill would not bill on its final passage > He saw no objection to such a be re-committed. It would create an injurious delay-course, and he thought the question was, whether it while, if there ever was a case in which a legislative de. would be just to delay the bill for this purpose. cision ought speedily to be made, it was this. The bill ought not, therefore, to be recommitted, so as to place it behind the other business. He thought the Senator from Maine might reach his object without recommitting the bill; and Mr. V. B. considered the best method would be, to offer an amendment to the effect proposed.

Mr. FOOT believed that there was one amendment pending, so that another would not now be in order. Mr. WOODBURY said that if the blank were first filled with the sum proposed, or whatever amount the Senate ght decide upon; or, if the present motion were rected, the gentleman from Maine could then attain his oject, by moving to amend the bill by adding a section. The gentleman would recollect, that the bill had been before a Select Committee, and he believed, after they

Mr. VAN BUREN asked the reading of the proposition made by Mr. PARRIS; which, having been complied with, Mr. V. B. said that it ought not to be adopted. It went infinitely beyond the object proposed by this bill, which was, to liquidate a debt to one class of individuals, who, having been promised half pay for life, had never received an equivalent for the benefit thus held forth in expectation. The proposition of the gentleman from Maine proposed to settle-not the certificates of commutation alone-but all the accounts of the Revolution. Mr. V. B. thought that the gentleman had taken an incorrect view of the subject, and trusted his motion would not prevail.

On motion of Mr. EATON, the bill was postponed until Monday, and made the order for that day.

Public Lands.

would be useless. The States would establish their own land offices, and regulate the surveys as they might think proper; and, in the Territories, the system, with the principle of graduating attached, would remain as at present. But, Mr. President, I am not vain enough to suppose that, in this proposition, I shall have luckily hit on that which will be most acceptable to the Senate. In relation to the terms, which are equitable and just, and on which the lands should be ceded to the States, we are as liable to hold a great variety of discordant opinions as on any other subject; and the abstract proposition, on which, perhaps, a large majority are agreed, is in danger of being lost by the discordance of its friends. If, however, we shall unfortunately come to no unison of opinion at the present time, still I hope that the discussion will be useful, in the comparison of opinions, and the development of views; and that, if not at the present, at some future day, it may aid in coming to some satisfactory conclusion.

[SENATE.

of the United States. This was the origin of the cessions. The cession from Virginia was authorized by act of her Legislative body in 1783, and was formally transferred by her delegates to the Congress of the Confede. ration, by deed bearing date the first of March, 1784. These transactions were anterior to the formation of the Constitution of the United States, and cannot be understood, without recurring to the circumstances under which they took place. These circumstances, some of them imperious and controlling in their character, and these only, can give us the reasons of the actors of that day, and unfold their views about the public domain. It had been a matter of much complaint, on the part of several States, that, in the articles of Confederation, no disposition was made of the crown lands. This will be found, perhaps, as fully set forth, in the objections of New Jersey to the Confederation, as any where else. The objections of New Jersey to the articles of the Confederation, respecting the public lands, were as follows-Vol. I. U. S. Laws, p. 24.

This Union is, in theory, formed of sovereign, equal, and independent States. In the older members of this "The ninth article provide, that no State shall be deConfederacy, the Federal Government sets up no claim prived of territory for the benefit of the United States." to the waste and unappropriated lands; has no land offi- "It was ever the confident expectation of this State, that ces, derives no revenues from the sales of lands. In the the benefits derived from a successful contest, were to be new States, this Government is the lord of the soil, has general and proportionate, and that the property of the established land offices, and collects millions from the common enemy, falling, in consequence of a prosperous sales of lands. A statesman or historian, making himself issue of the war, would belong to the United States, and acquainted with our system, would pronounce it, in the- be appropriated to their use. We are, therefore, greatly ory, beautiful. With nothing would he be more pleased disappointed, in finding no provision made in the Confethan with the republican equality of the States. But deration, for empowering the Congress to dispose of such what would be his surprise, when told, that, in seven, of property, but especially the vacant and unpatented lands, these States, the soil itself belonged to the Government commonly called the crown lands, for defraying the exof the Union, while, in seventeen States, the soil belong-penses of the war, and for such other public and general ed to the States themselves. Would he not instantly in purposes." "Reason and justice must decide, that the quire, why are the States of this Confederacy equal in property which existed in the crown of Great Britain, theory, when they are not so in fact? Why are they not previous to the present Revolution, ought now to belong male equal in reality, as they are in name? The answer to the Congress, in trust, for the use and benefit of the to this last inquiry would be the reasons against the pro- United States." "Shall such States as are shut out by position now before the Senate. He would then hear, situation, from availing themselves of the least advantage as we have so often heard, of the cessions, the pledge, from this quarter, be left to sink under an enormous debt, and the compacts. whilst others are enabled in a short period, to replace all their expenditures, from the hard earnings of the whole Confederacy?"

The proposition of New Jersey was, that all the crown lands, all the waste and unappropriated lands in all the States, should belong to Congress, as a source of reve. nue, to meet the expenses of the war. But this propo. sition so to amend the articles of the Confederation was rejected by the Congress of 1778, to which it was submitted, three States only, out of ten, voting for it.

that

I am aware, Mr. President, that these are usually resorted to, as the authority of this Government, to hold the lands in the States; but these authorities, taken in connexion with other portions of the history of that day, stead of showing title in the Federal Government, may, in my opinion, safely be relied on, to sustain a different position. It surely was the intention of the States ceding, and of Congress in receiving, these cessions, that the territory thus ceded should be formed into States, and should be received into the Union, as free, sovereign, and The objections of Maryland to the articles of the Conindependent States, on an equal footing with the original federation were also submitted to the same Congress. States, in all respects whatever. That they should thus An amendment was moved, in behalf of Maryland, be received into the Union was most certainly the inten- "the United States, in Congress assembled, shall have ion of the framers of the Constitution. To establish" power to appoint commissioners, who shall be fully ausustain the political equality of the States, the Con-"thorized and empowered to ascertain and restrict the tution had extended favors to the small States. It had "boundary of such of the confederated States, which ut political power, in some instances, into the hands of " claim to extend to the river Mississippi or South Sea." the small States, to balance numbers of the large States. This was also negatived. The equal representation in the Senate is an evidence of this I will take a brief notice of these cessions, this adge, and these compacts; and being more familiar With my own country than that of any other, I will take my facts and illustrations from that district chiefly ceded Virginia to the Union-that portion of country out of" ch is formed the States of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. Iwill leave to others-to the Senators from Mississippi, Asbama, Louisiana, and Missouri-to speak of that porof the public lands which was acquired by treaty France and Spain, and by cession from other States Tan Virginia.

The ninth article of the Confederation declared, that
State should be deprived of territory for the benefit

It

The objections of Rhode Island to the same articles, were also considered by the Congress of 1778. was proposed by that State, to add, "that all lands "within these States, the property of which, before the present war, was vested in the crown of Great Britain, or out of which revenues from quit-rents arise, payable "to the said crown, shall be deemed, taken, and consi. "dered, as the property of these United States, and be

66

disposed of and appropriated by Congress, for the be"nefit of the whole Confederacy." This proposition was also negatived, by a vote of States, nine to one. So far then we have, in three instances, the solemn decision of Congress, against the assumption of power over the unappropriated lands, within the limits of the States. Nor

SENATE ]

Public Lands.

[JAN. 28, 1828.

shall have been formed into sovereign, free, and inde. pendent States.

indeed, does it appear, that, after that period, 1778, was the proposition to give Congress the right of soil in the States ever renewed. This, sir, is a very important part Much stress appears to be placed on the language of of our history, respecting the public lands. In these three this pledge It is there said, that the lands so ceded instances, Congress positively refused to assume the "shall be considered a common fund, for the use and be. power of interfering with the right of soil, in the sove- "nefit of such of the United States as have become, or reign and independent States. Congress seemed to say "shall become, members of the Confederacy, or Federal of that proposition, that, being already clothed with the "alliance of the States, Virginia inclusive, according to sword and the purse of the nation, if power over the soil" their usual respective proportions in the general charge were added, there would be nothing but the shadow of a name left to the States.

Many causes, however, operated in producing these voluntary cessions on the part of the States. Those States in which there were but little unappropriated lands, and on whom the pressure of the war debt was at that time heavy, allured by the expectations, that there were pub lic lands sufficient to pay the debt, were pressing the idea of cession. Some of the States had not yet joined the Confederacy, dissatisfied with the articles of Confederation; and in order to quiet the discordant elements of the day, it was necessary to hit upon some measure likely to produce that effect. Congress, accordingly, by act of 1780, recommended to the several States having wild lands, to make liberal cessions of them to the Union, to pay the debt of the Revolution. This measure promised to have the desired effect. Nor was the situation of the States holding these lands, calculated to dissuade them from such cessions. Virginia had been exposed to great expenditures and sacrifices, in the prosecution of her Indian wars, and in garrisoning of posts on the territory in question, and to her, who had experience on that subject, there was little prospect that her finances, all things considered, were in a short time to be much benefitted by her public lands. The validity of her title, too, owing to the unexpected extent of her grant from the British crown, and its clashing with that of Connecticut, no doubt strongly induced her to the proposed cession. The grant of Connecticut running indefinitely West, and that of Virginia indefinitely North, would have thrown them upon the same territory, from the Western limits of Pennsylvania, along the shores of the Northern lakes, to the banks of the Mississippi. They would have held disputed titles, and of all things, collisions among the States were at that time to be most carefully avoided. Nor does the value set upon these lands at that day, seem to bear any comparison with their value according to modern estimates.

In examining the whole history of these cessions, from the articles of the Confederation to the formation of the Constitution, we find nothing to incline us to the opinion, that either Virginia or the United States expected this vast expanse of territory to remain in the hands of the Union, in the same condition it was in the hands of Virginia at the time of cession. That the condition in which these lands were placed by the cession, was not intended by either party to be a permanent one, is most certain from the cession itself, in which it is stipulated that new States shall be formed out of this territory.

But, it is said that we may not cede the lands to the States, because Congress stands bound to appropriate their proceeds to the payment of the public debt. The pledge, as it is called, is immediately referred to. This pledge, sir, I believe, is to be found no where else than in the act of cession of Virginia, and in her deed of transfer to the Union. If this be a pledge, it is made by Virginia herself, and is a guarantee that Congress will so appropriate the proceeds of the public lands. It is not, as is generally understood, a pledge made to Virginia by Congress. But, consider it in that light, and associate it with other parts of that instrument from which it cannot be separated, and you cannot fairly understand it to have reference at all to a period, after the political condition of the territory shall have been totally changed-after it

" and expenditure, and shall be faithfully and bona fide "disposed of for that purpose, and for no other use or "purpose whatsoever." There is not, in this pledge, any stipulation, that the new States, when admitted into the Union, shall never interfere with the primary dispo sal of the soil.

But, sir, whatever the language of this pledge may be, the object of the contracting parties is plainly ex pressed. That object was, that all the States should become, and remain, members of the Confederacy ; and, as a strong inducement for so doing, it was stipulated, that the proceeds of the ceded lands should be appropriated in favor only of those States that had subscribed the articles of Confederation. The quotas of such States as were not members of the Confederacy, should be required of them unaided by the proceeds of the territorial lands. Nor is this view of the subject weakened by the fact, that most of the thirteen States had, previous to these cessions, joined the Confederacy: for the policy of the cession had been determined on in 1780. New York had ceded before Virginia; and it is worthy of remark, that at least one of the delegates from Maryland subscribed the articles of Confederation the same day that New York ceded her unappropriated lands to the Union.

This provision held out to the New States, thereafter to be formed, strong inducements to join the Confederacy: for, refusing to do so, they would be deprived of their re spective proportions of the proceeds of the territorial lands, while they would be chargeable with their propor tions of the public debt. The inducement, too, in their case, was much strengthened by the ordinance of 1787, which prohibited them, after they should become States, from interfering with the primary disposal of their own soil, until they should have joined the Confederation.

But, connected with this pledge, there is another objection urged. The special words of the prohibition not to interfere with the primary disposal of the soil, &c. is understood by some as expressing a perpetuity co exten sive with time. This language, however, is familiar to the statute book, and from it nothing can be inferred. It is to be found in almost every act of Congress, from the Confederation to the present time. We are in the habit of saying in our statutes to day, that this, that, or the other regulation, shall be, and for ever remain, the law of the land, while we possess the power, and frequently, at the next session, exercise it, of repealing such law.

I have said, Mr. President, that this pledge has refer. ence only to a Territorial form of government, and has no reference whatever to a period, after the political condition of the country shall have been totally changed-after it shall have been formed into sovereign, free, and independent States. And, if it be not susceptible of this construction, it cannot be reconciled with the ordinance of 1787, which says, that, whenever any of the said States shall have 60,000 free inhabitants therein, such State shall be admitted, by its Delegates, into the Congress of the United States, on an equal footing with the original States, in all respects whatever. If the construction just given be not the true one, the pledge and this provision of the ordinance are at war with each other-are destructive of each other. And suppose, sir, that these lands were pledged in perpetuity, under all political circumstances, for the payment of the public debt: For what debt'

Surely for no other than the $ 42,000,000 then existing.
And has not that sum, in amount, been often paid.

But do gentlemen tell us that this pledge is a sacred
one, and may not be touched, until every tittle of the
procrastinated Revolutionary debt shall be paid? And if
so, will some one be kind enough to tell the Senate how
it comes to pass that more than 20,000,000 of acres have
already been legislated away in military bounties, and for
other purposes than paying the debt of the Revolution?
This pledge would seem to be one of flexible, convenient
character. Whenever it becomes necessary for this Go-
vernment to divert any portion of the public lands from
the object of this pledge, it can forthwith be done; but
when the fair claims of the new States are presented for
the whole, or a part of these lands, then, indeed, this
pledge rises in great majesty and strength. Put this mat-
ter on what ground soever you please, these lands are
long ago released. If bound for the payment of the Re-
volutionary debt, that debt is, in amount, long ago paid;
and if inseparable from the sovereignty of the States, they
are in that way released, although the debt be not
· paid.

If we carefully examine the ordinance of 1787, we shall see, on the face of it, that it never was intended, in the great mass of its provisions, to be applicable to the States when formed for some of its provisions are entirely inconsistent with every idea of State government, and in that view, they are contradictory to one another. Can any one believe that the ordinance would guaranty, on a particular event, the admission of these States into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, in all respects whatever, if it had been the intention of Congress to retain the full property of the soil, while the soil of the original States belonged to those States ?

[SENATE.

her Constitution, convened her Legislative body, enacted her own laws, was, in very deed, a State, and that her State sovereignty and equality, included her right to her public domain. It may also be stated, with much certainty, that difficulties such as these, finally kicked the beam in favor of her admission, more than any constitutional argument.

I am well aware, sir, that the Constitution will be resorted to for aid in the present case. We shall, no doubt, have quoted upon us the third section of the fourth, and the whole of the sixth article. We shall be told that Congress have power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the Territory, or other property belonging to the United States. But, those who contend for the validity of the ordinance, and its application in the present case, will surely not take the ground that its provisions were changed by the Constitution; for, if they do, they have themselves no ground to stand upon. If you say the ordinance was repealed by the Constitution of the United States, you lose the benefit of its prohibitions against the new States; and if you admit that the ordinance, with its guarantees in favor of the new States, is sanctioned by the Constitution, you must admit, that the new States, with a population of 60,000, were entitled to admission into the Union, on an equal footing with the original States.

The ordinance is, in many of its provisions, a compact between the original States and the People and States in the Territory. It contains engagements of both parties; and the sixth article of the Constitution declares, that all engagements, entered into before the adoption of the Constitution, shall be valid. plated the public lands as belonging to the new States, The ordinance contemafter their admission into the Union; and, if all other auThe resolution of 1780 provided for the formation of the thorities were wanting to prove this, the ninth article of ceded territory into States, and determined, that, when the Confederation would be sufficient. It declares, that admitted, they should have the same rights of sovereignty, no State shall be deprived of territory for the benefit of freedom, (and independence, as the other States. The the United States. These articles were made for the goordinance specified the boundaries of the districts, and re-vernment of the United States, and for the States which cognized them as States, before their admission into the should adopt them in future; and the ordinance was Union. It gave them the right, severally, of demanding framed in accordance with those articles. They were the such admission, whenever they should have sixty thou- basis of the ordinance of 1787. They were the constisand free inhabitants, and gave them the right, also, of tution of that day, and the ordinance cannot be construed forming for themselves permanent Constitutions and State in violation of them. Governments. Being recognized as States before they compared with this article, becomes perfectly clear. The meaning of the ordinance, had joined the Confederacy, the Congress of 1787 thought proper to restrain them, previous to their joining the object of all parties in the regulation of the Territorial Mr. President, the union of the States was the grand Union, from the primary disposal of the soil. This was, lands. The articles of confederation had provided, that perhaps, at that day, when every patriot was tremblingly no State should be deprived of territory for the benefit solicitous for the stability and perpetuity of the Republic, of the United States; that Congress should not assume a valuable provision. It held out inducements, strong the ownership of the soil in the States. With this, many and powerful, to the new States, to become members of States were dissatisfied, and hesitated about joining the the Confederacy; and it was the Legislatures of the new Union. To remedy this, the cessions provided, that no States, who had not joined the Confederacy, and these State out of the Confederacy should participate in the only, that were prohibited interfering with the primary proceeds of those lands; and the ordinance further prodisposal of the soil. They had a right to demand admis- vided, that the new States, refusing to join the Union, son with a population of sixty thousand, and to form, at should not only be excluded from all participation in the that period, permanent Constitutions and State Govern- proceeds of the territorial lands without their limits, but ments. They were, at that period of their history, and that they should be prohibited from interfering with the not till then, promised admission on an equal footing with primary disposal of the soil within their limits. As a furthe original States; and if Congress had refused them ad- ther inducement to the new States to join the Confedera. mission, they would still have remained States, and the cy, the ordinance stipulated that they should be admitted equal footing which was guarantied them, being ascer-into the Union, with a population of 60,000, on an equal tained by comparison with the original States, would have footing with the original States, in all respects whatever ; attached to them. This opinion is not novel. For this opinion, the ablest provides, that all engagements entered into before the and the Constitution, in sustenance of the same policy, statesmen contended, in the question of admitting, with-adoption of the Constitution, shall be as valid against the Gut restriction, the State of Missouri. I will not, Mr. Pre-United States, under the Constitution, as under the Consident, weary the Senate, in giving extracts from the federation. So that the articles of the Confederation, the speeches of that day, volumes of which could be instant- acts of cession, the ordinance of 1787, and the Constituly produced. The occasion is in the recollection of tion itself, form a perfect and harmonious chain of poli every one. It was contended for, by many of the advo- cy-the grand object of which was, the union and equalcates for the Missouri admission, that she, having formed ity of the States.