OF 
 
 HON. RICHARD YATES, OF ILLINOIS, 
 
 ON 
 
 THE LAND POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES, AND IN DEFENSE OF THE WEST, 
 
 A 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, APRIL 23, 1852. 
 
 WASHINGTON: % 
 
 4 
 
 SHUNTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 
 
 1852 . 
 
i 
 
 
LAND POLICY—DEFENSE OF THE 
 
 WEST. 
 
 The House being in the Committee of the Whole on the bill 
 ** to encourage agriculture, manufactures, commerce, and 
 ‘ other branches of industry, by granting to every man who is 
 ‘ the head of a family, a homestead of one hundred and sixty 
 ‘acres of land out of the public domain, upon condition of 
 ‘ occupancy and cultivation of the same, for the period 
 ‘herein specified”— 
 
 Mr. YATES said: 
 
 Mr. Chairman: I shall endeavor, in the few 
 remarks which I shall make upon this occasion, 
 to confine myself chiefly to the subject legitimately 
 before the committee. The consideration of this 
 bill very properly invites discussion, as to the 
 whole land policy of the Government. Whether 
 the present policy as to the public lands is to be 
 continued, or whether Congress shall adopt a new 
 policy, are questions which are now occupying a 
 large share of the attention of Congress, and of the 
 country. In the attempt to present my views upon 
 this question, I am aware that nothing short of the 
 presidential question seems to awaken the interest 
 of the committee, and I almost shrink from the 
 effort to arrest its attention, by remarks upon the 
 appropriate business and practical questions which 
 it is our duty, as legislators, to investigate. 
 
 The constitutional power of Congress to make 
 grants of lands to actual settlers, or to the States, 
 for the construction of railroads, has been denied 
 by most of the gentlemen who have addressed the 
 committee against these propositions. I do not 
 propose to discuss the question of constitutional 
 power at length. If a question can be settled by 
 precedent, then I think that the right of Congress 
 to make these grants may be considered a settled 
 question. When the propriety of such grants 
 first came before Congress, the question of con¬ 
 stitutional power underwent a thorough discus¬ 
 sion. The greatest minds in the country were 
 pitted against each other, and I believe the power 
 to make the grants was finally conceded by nearly 
 all. Most certainly, it has been repeatedly exer¬ 
 cised without being called in question. Grants 
 for purposes of education, to asylums, to actual 
 settlers, and for the promotion of internal improve¬ 
 ments, have been made at sundry times, beginning 
 with the administration of Washington, down to 
 the present day. When we have the opinions of 
 such men as Mr. Clay and Mr. Webster, General 
 Cass and Mr. Douglas, and nearly all the leading 
 men of both parties, and especially the opinions 
 of the strict constructionists of the Constitution, 
 including Mr. Calhoun, who was ever jealous of 
 the exercise of any doubtful constitutional power; 
 I say when we have such an array of authority in 
 
 favor of this constitutional power, added to the 
 uniform practice of the Government, and enforced 
 by the legislation of almost every Congress, it 
 would seem that this might well be considered a 
 settled question. I do not say that precedent is 
 everything, but I do say that the opinions of our 
 profoundest statesmen and lawgivers, expressed 
 after mature deliberation, are entitled to high con¬ 
 sideration. 
 
 The arguments against the exercise of this power, 
 relied upon by gentlemen who have addressed the 
 committee, are presented in their strongest light in 
 the National Intelligencer of this morning, and I 
 will call the attention of the committee to the two 
 strong points taken in that paper, and which I do 
 not consider well taken. That paper says: 
 
 “ The property of ‘ the people of the United States,’ 
 whether it is money in the Treasury or the public lands, 
 cannot be rightfully used by those who govern our affairs, 
 unless it is done : in order to form a more perfect Union , 
 ‘ establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for 
 ‘ the common defense, promote the general welfare, and 
 1 secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our pos- 
 ‘ terity .’ ” 
 
 Now, if it can be shown that the passage of 
 this bill will accomplish any of these objects, then 
 the “public lands maybe rightfully used for these 
 grants to the objects indicated.” Now I submit 
 to this committee the question, Is it not for the 
 “ general welfare” to promote the settlement 
 of the public lands? Is it not for the general wel¬ 
 fare to establish an independent yeomanry upon 
 our broad and beautiful public domain of one 
 thousand four hundred million acres of land? Is 
 it not for the general welfare that we encourage 
 the agricultural productions of the country and 
 improve the condition of our industrious poor? 
 Is it not for the general welfare to discourage 
 speculation in the public lands, to fell the forest, 
 to make “the wilderness bloom and blossom as 
 the rose,” and to cover that mighty area of terri¬ 
 tory extending from the Ohio river to the Pacific 
 ocean, with a population of independent freehold¬ 
 ers, and to withdraw population from the tempta¬ 
 tions and vices of crowded cities to the purer 
 atmosphere of rural life. 
 
 The same paper says: 
 
 “ A title by ‘ actual settlement ’ is absurd, unless legal 
 policy may thus encourage hardy pioneers to enter the 
 forest and plant the footsteps of civilization in its dark re¬ 
 cesses. With this view, however, what are called ‘ pre¬ 
 emptions ’ may be justly favored and protected.” 
 
 The constitutionality of granting preemptions is 
 not denied by any. The consideration upon which 
 
4 
 
 they are granted is to encourage settlement. Is it 
 not the same “ legal policy” to encourage that set¬ 
 tlement by making grants to the actual settler? 
 Under the preemption system, the settler often 
 has the privilege of buying, to the exclusion of all 
 others, land at $1 25 per acre worth ten times that 
 sum. He can enter upon the public lands as soon 
 as they are surveyed, and before they are offered 
 at public sale, and purchase the same at the Gov¬ 
 ernment price, though at the sale others might be 
 ready and willing to pay five times that sum. If 
 the Government may thus surrender its rights to 
 promote settlement, may it not, for the same ob¬ 
 ject, grant lands worth $1 25 per acre, or less, to 
 the actual settler? The principle is the same in 
 both cases. It is the same in grants of bounty 
 lands to the soldier, and when the “ legal policy ” 
 is admitted in the one case, it cannot be denied in 
 the other. 
 
 I call the attention of gentlemen to that article 
 of the Constitution which provides that “Con¬ 
 gress shall have power to dispose of, and make all 
 needful rules and regulations respecting, the ter¬ 
 ritory or other property of the United States.” 
 “ It shall have the power to dispose of ”—here is an 
 unlimited power. It is not derived by construc¬ 
 tion or implication—it is an express power. The 
 manner of this disposition, and the objects of the 
 appropriation, are of course to be left to the dis¬ 
 cretion of Congress. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, it is amusing to see how certain 
 gentlemen can find authority to make appropria¬ 
 tions to some objects, and at the same time deny 
 any power to make appropriations for other ob¬ 
 jects of precisely the same character. The gen¬ 
 tleman from New York, [Mr. Jenkins,] in his 
 speech, maintained that our rivers were very prop¬ 
 erly the objects of national concern, and that 
 appropriations for their improvement were legiti¬ 
 mately within the power of Congress, but stoutly 
 denied that Congress had any power to make 
 grants of either money or lands for the construc¬ 
 tion of railroads. These, he says, are the objects 
 of State concern exclusively. Now, here is a 
 “distinction without a difference.” The only 
 difference is, that the one is water, the other iron. 
 The object of both is to facilitate intercourse be¬ 
 tween the different portions of the Confederacy. 
 Certainly communication by means of railroads 
 is more direct; it is cheaper, safer, and speedier. 
 All the operations of commerce, and all the objects 
 of such a grant, can be as well or better carried 
 out by the construction of railroads than by the 
 improvement of rivers, and therefore I can see no 
 objection to grants of lands to the State to aid in 
 their construction. 
 
 EXTENT OF PUBLIC DOMAIN. 
 
 There are several specific propositions before 
 Congress—the bill now pending, granting lands to 
 actual settlers; the bill granting 10,000,000 of 
 acres to the States to be applied to the relief of the 
 indigent insane; and various bills granting alter¬ 
 nate sections of the public lands for the construc¬ 
 tion of railroads. I am in favor of the principle 
 contained in all these propositions. I speak not 
 of the details of these bills. If wrong in detail, 
 when the time arrives for their consideration they 
 can be amended to obviate objections. I am sur¬ 
 prised that some of the advocates for grants to 
 actual settlers, and for the relief of the insane, 
 
 seem to regard railroad grants as coming in con¬ 
 flict with them. Why, sir, nothing can be fur¬ 
 ther from the fact. There is no conflict. There 
 are enough lands for all. They cannot and will 
 not be exhausted for a thousand years to come. 
 The following table will show the quantity of 
 public lands, sold and unsold, the proceeds of 
 sales, and the grants and reservations of the same 
 for all purposes, up to the 30th September, 1851: 
 
 Sold.101.633,930 acres. 
 
 Grants tor schools, &.c. 40,558,978 “ 
 
 For Deaf and Dumb Asylums. 44,971 “ 
 
 For internal improvements. 11,500,395 “ 
 
 To individuals and companies. 279,792 “ 
 
 For seats of government, &c. 50,860 “ 
 
 For military services. 16,019,065 “ 
 
 Reserved for salines. 422,325 “ 
 
 Reserved for benefit of Indians. 3,400,725 “ 
 
 Reserved for companies, corporations, &.c. 8,955,383 “ 
 
 Confirmed private claims. 7,123,903 “ 
 
 Swamp lands granted to the States. 27,397,260 “ 
 
 Central railroad grant. 3,025,920 “ 
 
 Total of acres unsold and unappropriated, of 
 offered and unoffered lands on the 30th Septem¬ 
 ber, 1851, 1,399,586,140.53 acres. 
 
 It appears from this table, that in a period of 
 seventy years only 101,633,930 of acres have been 
 sold, and that the Government still has on hand a 
 mighty domain of over thirteen hundred millions 
 of acres. Is here not an ample fund for all the pur¬ 
 poses of education, for the relief of the insane, 
 for homes to the actual settler, and for the pur¬ 
 poses of internal improvement? 
 
 GRANTS FOR RELIEF OF INSANE. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, much as 1 desire to see portions 
 of the public lands appropriated to internal im- 
 i provements, yet this is not the chief measure with 
 me. In my humble estimation, the first and most 
 desirable application of the public domain, is to 
 make ample provision for the insane, the deaf and 
 dumb, and the blind. The Government could not 
 make a more useful application of a portion of the 
 public domain, than by assisting each State and 
 Territory to endow an institution for each of these 
 objects. The census of 1840, in a total popula¬ 
 tion of 17,069,453 persons in the United States, 
 exhibited an insane population of 17,457; and the 
 census of 1850 in a total population of 23,267,498, 
 gave an insane population of 27,000. The in¬ 
 crease of the victims of insanity, is in a ratio far 
 greater than the increase of the whole popula¬ 
 tion. But, sir, the results of proper medical treat¬ 
 ment in institutions established for this purpose 
 have been most gratifying. Thousands who were 
 considered hopelessly insane have been restored 
 to reason, and there is every reason to believe 
 that the frightful increase of this dread malady 
 may be in a great measure stayed, if proper relief is 
 afforded. 
 
 The grants in favor of these objects, should be 
 munificent, and such as, with the aid of the States, 
 would place these institutions beyond the contin¬ 
 gency of want. These grants are not contended 
 for on the ground maintained by certain political 
 economists of France, that it is the duty of the 
 Government to furnish direct subsistence to the 
 people, and which has led her impulsive popula¬ 
 tion to clamor for Government aid, instead of re¬ 
 lying upon the surer rewards of honest industry 
 and persevering labor. It is upon the higher prin¬ 
 ciple of duty to the children of misfortune, who, 
 by the inscrutable decrees of an overruling Provi- 
 
 # 
 
 4 
 
\ 
 
 5 
 
 dence, are deprived of the ability to procure means 
 of support or education. There comes to us, sir, 
 an appeal from these unfortunate classes of our 
 population addressing itself to the kindliest sym¬ 
 pathies, the noblest impulses of the heart, as well 
 as to the highest considerations of patriotism. Yes, 
 sir, from the dethroned intellects of the twenty- 
 seven thousand maniacs in the land, the stopped 
 ears of the deaf and dumb, from the sightless eye¬ 
 balls of the blind, closed forever to the beautiful 
 frame-work of art and nature, by which we are 
 surrounded, comes this appeal. 
 
 No longer needing the public lands as a source 
 of revenue, some statesmen of great eminence 
 have regarded their possession as a curse, rather 
 than a blessing. But this depends upon the uses 
 to which they are applied. If our public domain 
 is discreetly applied, it will be an exhaustless 
 fountain of blessedness to the people. And, if 
 Congress will look at it aright, and will grant to 
 the States a sufficient quantity of these lands to 
 endow these institutions, and to place the means of 
 relief within the reach of these sad children of 
 misfortune, it will have accomplished one of the 
 noblest and most sacred objects in the sight of 
 God or man. Much is said about progress, but 
 this is a sort of progress which will prove incon¬ 
 testably the Christian enlightenment of the age, and 
 bind new and bright glories around the brow of the 
 Republic. It may be a weakness in this business 
 age of finance, steam, and railroads, a sickly senti¬ 
 mentality perhaps; yet I confess that for appropri¬ 
 ations for these sacred objects is my first desire, 
 and I would rather see all the projects for grants 
 of the public lands fail than these. I would have 
 each State, by the aid of these lands, erect a mag¬ 
 nificent edifice, with comfortable and spacious 
 apartments, adorned with the decorations of art 
 and every pleasing embellishment; surrounded by 
 large inclosures of forest tree, beautiful shrub, 
 and blooming flower. So that if your wife, or 
 daughter, or mine, should ever fall victims to in¬ 
 sanity, (and it is a calamity to which all are liable,) 
 instead of being confined within narrow apart¬ 
 ments and prison-houses, she may walk forth in 
 the light of God’s glorious sun, breathe Heaven’s 
 pure air, and, if her fancy choose, pluck a flower 
 by the wayside. 
 
 Sir, that page of history which shall record, 
 that the American Congress, in the year 1852, made 
 ample provision for these sacred objects, will be an 
 immortal page. And when noble edifices for these 
 objects are erected, and these institutions are firmly 
 established, they will redound to the lasting honor 
 of the Congress which made the appropriation, 
 and will be pointed to by our children and chil¬ 
 dren’s children from generation to generation, as 
 the proudest monuments of the glory of the nation. 
 
 I cannot here forbear to refer to the fact, that the 
 State of Illinois, in addition to her tax for the sup¬ 
 port of the Government, and in addition to her 
 separate tax for the payment of the public debt, 
 with a spirit worthy of her people, imposed a sep¬ 
 arate tax for the relief of her insane and the edu¬ 
 cation of her blind and deaf and dumb. And 
 perhaps three nobler edifices are not to be found 
 in any State than those which she has erected— 
 the pride of every citizen, the admiration of every 
 stranger, and the glory and delight of every patriot 
 and Christian. Sir, what must be the pleasure 
 with which every citizen of Indiana and Illinois 
 
 reads the following tribute from Miss Dix, the 
 great philanthropist of the age, and the illustrious 
 benefactress of her race. She says: 
 
 u Look at Indiana—noble, clear sighted Indiana. She 
 adopted a wise and noble policy, equally prudent and hu¬ 
 mane, and levied a special tax for the insane, for the deaf 
 mutes and the blind within her borders, at a cost of more 
 than $200,000.” “There, in that young State, almost 
 within the shadow of hercapitol, stand these monuments 
 of a Christian and enlightened age, recording a forethought 
 and munificence which, under the circumstances, has no 
 parallel; though Illinois, ranging side by side geograph¬ 
 ically, almost completes a corresponding page in her his¬ 
 tory.” 
 
 The above extract is taken from her memorial 
 to the Legislature of Maryland. And, in justice 
 ; to my State, I may say that the expenses already 
 incurred by the State of Illinois for these objects 
 : exceed considerably the sum of $200,000. Now, 
 sir, when it is considered that both these States, 
 and many others, are embarrassed by heavy debts, 
 and that all the States are taxed to the utmost of 
 the ability of the people to bear, it will be seen 
 that this aid from the public lands would be most 
 timely and appropriate, and of the greatest im¬ 
 portance. 
 
 GRANTS TO ACTUAL SETTLERS. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I shall not go into the discus¬ 
 sion at length of the bill under consideration. I 
 have for many years entertained opinions favorable 
 to grants of the public lands in limited quantities 
 to actual settlers. But I humbly conceive that 
 those advocates of this bill, who oppose grants for 
 railroads are much in error; for it is only by open¬ 
 ing roads through the public lands, and making 
 them accessible to market, that they are to be made 
 desirable homes for the actual settler. 
 
 A better illustration of the effects of the present 
 land system could not be given than the declara¬ 
 tion which has been made by the gentleman from 
 New York [Mr. Sutherland] to this committee. 
 He says that he knows, at his boarding-house, 
 four individuals, who own 50,000 acres, each, of 
 the public lands. I would ask that gentleman, if 
 that system is to be considered beneficial, which 
 tolerates the withholding of th<?“e lands from set¬ 
 tlement and occupation in the hands of wealthy 
 speculators, to the exclusion and injury of the 
 poor and industrious citizens? Would it not be 
 better to have these lands in cultivation, divided 
 into small farms, and occupied by our industrious 
 poor families, than for them to remain unim¬ 
 proved, and absorbed entirely by speculators? Is 
 that a just system which permits the wealthy spec¬ 
 ulator, who makes no improvements, to hold on 
 to these lands until the actual settler, by the im¬ 
 provement of adjacent lands, has made them valu¬ 
 able, and then to charge him five times the Gov¬ 
 ernment price for them ? 
 
 The only plausible objection to the policy of 
 these grants to actual settlers, which at first struck 
 me, but which, I believe, has not been advanced 
 here, was, that the effect would be to depreciate 
 the lands in the hands of present proprietors. But 
 the reverse, I believe, will be the effect. The class 
 of persons, who would go on a quarter section and 
 occupy and cultivate it for five years to get a title 
 thereto, would be in the main poor persons, and 
 unable to buy of present proprietors. I doubt, 
 sir, whether it would make a single purchaser 
 less. The bounty land laws, which have absorbed 
 16,019,065 acres, have not had the effect to reduce 
 
the prices of lands already occupied and improved. 
 The effect, I think, would be to increase prices to 
 present owners, by bringing into settlement and 
 improvement the public lands which would other¬ 
 wise remain in market for sale, and which now 
 come into competition with the lands of present 
 owners. The prices of lands in the hands of pres¬ 
 ent owners, are unquestionably kept down by 
 the large quantity of the public lands which are 
 subject to sale at $1 25 per acre—purchasers being 
 unwilling to pay from five to twenty dollars per acre 
 for improved lands, when they can get them at the 
 Go vernrnent price. 
 
 The new States have a deep and vital interest in 
 the passage of this bill. They want settlement. 
 They want these lands to pass out of the hands 
 of the Government into the hands of individuals, 
 so as to make them taxable, and contribute their 
 share to the support of the State governments. 
 The passage of this bill would increase greatly 
 the immigration to the land States, insure the set¬ 
 tlement and improvement of the vacant lands, and 
 augment the capital of the new States, which they 
 so much need to enable them to engage in manu¬ 
 facturing, the construction of roads, and other 
 important public enterprises. 
 
 The General Government would lose nothing— 
 the settlement and improvement of portions of the 
 public lands would increase the value of the con¬ 
 tiguous lands remaining unoccupied, and would 
 add vastly to the aggregate of agricultural pro¬ 
 duction and national prosperity. 
 
 But, sir, the highest consideration is the effect 
 which it wouldhaveto raisetoindependence,and to 
 elevate a large portion of our fellow-citizens who 
 gain a hard, scanty, and uncertain subsistence from 
 the earnings of daily labor, or who, in the dependent 
 relation of tenants, pay one third or one half of the 
 proceeds of their labor to the owners of the soil. 
 
 I cannot forbear to quote, in favor of the pas¬ 
 sage of this bill, the very extract which the gen¬ 
 tleman from New York [Mr. Jenkins] has quoted 
 against it: 
 
 “Destitution in Philadelphia. —The Philadelphia 
 American gives an account of a visit made a few dai s ago 
 to the hovels of many of the poor and destitute of that city, 
 who live in small unventilated rooms, for which they are 
 compelled to pay ten cents rent each day. It is supposed 
 the number of these unfortunate beings is about live thou¬ 
 sand. Many of them were found with theirhands and feet 
 frozen for want of fuel to keep them warm, while others 
 had even disposed of most of their scanty clothing to buy 
 bread. In one cellar a family were found who had been 
 turned out of home because they were unable to pay their 
 rent. In another place, a poor miserable woman and sev¬ 
 eral children were found in a shed, the children covered up 
 in a heap of ashes to keep them warm. Having no clothing 
 whatever to cover them, the mother had been driven to this 
 resort to keep them from freezing. The clothes had been 
 sold to buy bread.” 
 
 Now, sir, the gentleman is most unfortunate in 
 making this quotation. If he had labored for 
 months, he could not have presented a more forci¬ 
 ble argument in favor of the bill. Pass this bill, 
 and a strong inducement will be presented to every 
 one who is destitute of the means of support, and 
 who has industry, to fly to the public lands; and 
 instead of five thousand persons in unventilated 
 rooms, and in a state of destitution, in the city of 
 Philadelphia, we will, in a few years, have as 
 many independent landholders in the Western 
 States in the full enjoyment of all the blessings of 
 life. 
 
 Representatives from the West will bear me out 
 
 in the assertion I am about to make. There are 
 thousands of tenants in the Western country with 
 large families, who are unable to make a dollar 
 over and above the amount required for the sup¬ 
 port of themselves and families, after paying to 
 the owners of the soil one third of the proceeds 
 of their annual labor. How much ameliorated 
 would their condition be, if they had their own 
 soil to cultivate—homes of their own, and the 
 exclusive enjoyment of the hard earnings of their 
 daily labor? Secure to the industrious poor man 
 a home of one hundred and sixty acres of rich 
 and productive land, and you attach him to the 
 country. You give him a new and certain in¬ 
 terest in the soil. He is then a freeholder, a pro¬ 
 prietor of his own broad acres. His interest 
 is identified with the Government and society. 
 He pays taxes; he takes an interest in schools 
 and churches, roads and bridges, and in the 
 voice of the ballot-box. He feels like a man, 
 and he is then, in the full sense of that proud ap¬ 
 pellation, an American citizen. For these, and 
 numerous other considerations, I hope this Con¬ 
 gress will decide, that out of the 1,400,000,000 
 unsold acres of the public domain, every family, 
 every poor and homeless American citizen, may 
 find a home —a home, sir, which he can call his 
 own—his castle of strength, where, secure be¬ 
 neath his humble roof and around his own fire¬ 
 side, “ he can worship God beneath his own vine 
 and fig tree, none daring to molest or make him 
 afraid.” 
 
 GRANTS OF LANDS TO ILLINOIS. 
 
 Much has been said in the progress of this debate 
 aboutthe grants to Illinois, While the twelve land 
 States are denounced by the gentleman from New 
 York as playing a ‘ ‘ grab game in the struggle to see 
 which could get the largest share,” and are de¬ 
 nounced as land stealers, Illinois unfortunately is 
 looked upon as, par excellence, the biggest land thief 
 of all. Her good fortune in securing liberal grants, 
 has caused her to be regarded with a sort of mali¬ 
 ciousness, which she in nowise merits, and which 
 are by no means justified by the facts of the case. 
 What was the principle upon which Congress ap¬ 
 propriated alternate sections of the public lands to 
 aid her in the construction of her Illinois and 
 Michigan Canal and the Central Railroad? Did 
 the United States make them without an equiva¬ 
 lent? Did Illinois claim them as a charity, or for 
 her exclusive benefit? No, sir; very far from it. 
 The grants were made upon higher considerations 
 than mere benefit to Illinois—considerations of the 
 general welfare and national prosperity. The State 
 occupied the relation of trustee or agent to the 
 General Government to appropriate the lands to the 
 construction of works of acknowledged national 
 importance, and in such a way as to present induce¬ 
 ments for the sale and occupancy of her other 
 wild lands which had never before existed. These 
 works were essential links in a great national 
 highway extending from the ocean to the gulf, 
 and affecting in a high degree the interests of one 
 half the States of the Americen Union. Take the 
 map of the United States and look at it. From 
 Portland, in Maine, from New York and all the 
 Eastern cities, by various routes to Lake Erie, 
 across that lake to Detroit, thence to New Buffalo, 
 thence across Lake Michigan to Chicago, thence 
 by the canal and Illinois river, or Central Railroad, 
 to Cairo, and through the States of Kentucky, 
 
7 
 
 Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama to Mobile, 
 a distance of one thousand eight hundred miles! 
 Why, sir, the world in all its past history has not 
 seen such a route. Here, sir, is the greatest high¬ 
 way of ancient or modern times. The Roman 
 ways were the pride of the people in the days of 
 Roman power; but they dwindle into insignifi¬ 
 cance compared with this mighty track of the iron 
 horse. It was not for Illinois alone, but for the 
 nation that these grants were made The State of 
 Illinois was the mere crossing-place for the States 
 of the Union. 
 
 But what has the Government lost by her grants 
 of land to Illinois? The lands along the line of 
 the Central Railroad had been in market exposed 
 to sale at the land offices for twenty-five years, 
 and on account of their remoteness from market 
 and destitution of timber were likely to remain 
 unsold for half a century more. They came under 
 the denomination of refuse lands, and belonged to 
 that class which at a former session of Congress 
 were proposed to be ceded to the States in which 
 they were situated, to enable the Government to 
 dispense with the expensive machinery of land 
 offices and other expenses, which cost the Gov¬ 
 ernment more than the revenue derived from their 
 sale. Sir, it would not take long to convince any 
 gentleman on this floor, who would go along the 
 route of the Central Railroad, that the Govern¬ 
 ment, as a great landholder, had adopted the most 
 effectual means of imparting value to her lands 
 and bringing them into market, and that, while 
 doing this directly, she had indirectly given an 
 impulse to trade, a stimulus to production, and 
 opened new fields to enterprise, affecting in no 
 small degree a large portion of the Union. It 
 is a fact, that a large number of the citizens of 
 southern Illinois have for many years occupied 
 and improved portions of the public lands, with¬ 
 out procuring any title from the Government, and 
 without the fear of having their possessions dis¬ 
 turbed. These lands being in sparsely-settled sec¬ 
 tions, and inaccessibly situated, were a hard bar¬ 
 gain even to the settler, and failed to excite the 
 cupidity of the speculator. But now that this 
 road has been projected, they are becoming anxious 
 about their titles, are asserting their preemptions, 
 and thousands are anxiously waiting, with their 
 hard dollars, or warrants laid by, to take up the 
 reserved lands within the thirty-mile strip re¬ 
 served from sale the moment they are brought into 
 market. And yet not a spade of earth has been 
 removed on the road; but these lands will now, in 
 bare expectancy of its completion, readily yield 
 the $2 50 per acre, and thus realize to the Govern¬ 
 ment every dollar she asked for the whole at a 
 period much earlier than she could have realized 
 the same without the grant. If the gentleman 
 from Maine [Mr. Fuller] is right, they are, or 
 soon will be, worth $10 per acre. What, then, 
 has the Government lost ? 
 
 THE ILLINOIS AND MICHIGAN CANAL. 
 
 The gentleman from New York [Mr. Jenkins] 
 has asserted, (1 know not upon what authority,) 
 that the grant of alternate sections of lands to the 
 State of Illinois, to aid in the construction of her 
 canal, has resulted in great injury to that State. 
 It is easy to show that the construction of this 
 great work has had an immense effect in promo¬ 
 ting the settlement of the public lands and the | 
 
 prosperity of the State of Illinois. To show its 
 influence upon the commerce and prosperity of 
 northern Illinois, it is onty necessary to call the 
 attention of the committee to some of the statis¬ 
 tics of the commerce and growth of the city of 
 Chicago, situated at its terminus on Lake Michi¬ 
 gan. In the year 1847, before the completion of 
 the canal, the imports and exports of the city were 
 only $4,500,000; while in the year 1848, the first 
 year after its completion, they amounted to 
 $20,000,000. The shipments of corn from the 
 port of Chicago in the year 1847, were 67,305 
 bushels; in 1848, 550,460 bushels; and in 1851, 
 3,221,137 bushels; and of this amount, 2,235,362 
 bushels were received into Chicago by way of the 
 canal. The lumber trade of the city doubled in a 
 single year after the completion of the canal. So 
 immense is this trade, that considerably over 
 100,000 tons of lumber are annually transported 
 on the canal, and down the Illinois river into the 
 interior of the State—the evidences of which, as 
 remarked by the Chicago Tribune, may be seen 
 in the transformation of the rude log-cabin to the 
 elegant mansion, and in the erection of commo¬ 
 dious church edifices and comfortable school- 
 houses, and in a great variety of valuable and 
 extensive improvements. 
 
 General Cass said in the Senate Chamber in 
 1848, “ It is now twenty-five years ago that I sat 
 ‘ all night in a canoe at the head of a pond at 
 ‘ Chicago, there being no human habitation in 
 ‘ which we could obtain shelter from the mouth of 
 ‘ the Illinois to the mouth of the Chicago river.” 
 And yet, sir, Chicago is now an important city— 
 the second city of the lakes. Look at its wonder¬ 
 ful growth. Its population in the year 1840 was 
 4,479; in 1848, 20,023; and now, in 1852, it is 
 40,000. And hence, sir, her destiny is onward 
 to her proud elevation as empress of the lakes, 
 the great-commercial emporium into whose com¬ 
 mission houses shall pour one third of the com¬ 
 merce of the Union—a mighty city, rivaling an¬ 
 cient Carthage in her pride of power. And since 
 the period referred to by General Cass, the coun¬ 
 try stretching from the mouth of the Chicago to 
 the mouth of the Illinois river—a distance of four 
 hundred miles—has made rapid advancement, and 
 has now a better foundation for solid and durable 
 prosperity than any portion of the American 
 Union of equal extent. 
 
 In the year 1831,1 first ascended the Illinois 
 river. The whole commerce of the river was 
 then carried on by some four or five old steam¬ 
 boats, which being unsafe for the dangerous navi¬ 
 gation of the Mississippi river, were transferred 
 to this river, whose current is gentle, and in good 
 stages of water perhaps the best navigable stream 
 in the world. But now, sir, from fifteen to 
 twenty-five medium-sized steamers ply weekly 
 between St. Louis and Lasalle, the western termi¬ 
 nus of the canal, a distance of three hundred and 
 twenty miles, laden with ponderous cargoes of 
 merchandise, produce, and lumber, and thronged 
 with thousands of travelers in pursuit of business 
 I or pleasure on their routes South, by way of the 
 Mississippi, or to the new States and Territories 
 of the Northwest by way of Galena, or by way 
 of the Northern lakes and railway routes to the 
 Eastern cities. 
 
 ILLINOIS RIVER. 
 
 It will surprise many to learn, that since the con- 
 
8 
 
 struction of the canal, the transportation and travel | 
 on the Illinois river is greater than that on either ! 
 the upper Mississippi or Missouri rivers. In the 
 year 1851, there was imported into the city of St. 
 Louis from the Illinois river 385,267 bushels more 
 of wheat than from the Missouri river, and 215,277 
 bushels more than from the upper Mississippi. 
 The difference in the article of corn is still greater. 
 In the year 1850, there were seven hundred and 
 eighty-eight arrivals of steamboats at the city of 
 St. Louis from the Illinois river, and in 1851, six 
 hundred and thirty-four; and in the two years, the 
 arrivals from the Illinois river were one hundred 
 and forty-eight more than from the Missouri, 
 seven hundred and thirty-one more than from the 
 upper Mississippi, four hundred and seventy-two 
 more than from the Ohio, and six hundred and 
 ninety-two more than from New Orleans. And, 
 moreover, one half of the tonnage on the Illinois 
 river finds its outlet north by way of Chicago, 
 instead of south by way of St. Louis. Of the 
 three million bushels of corn transported on the 
 river, two millions seek its Eastern market by way 
 of the canal and the lakes. An estimate furnished 
 me by Captain A. B. Dewit, one of the oldest and 
 most experienced navigators of that stream, shows 
 that about 1,160,000 tons of produce, 820,000 tons 
 of merchandise, and three hundred tons of lum¬ 
 ber and salt are annually transported on this river 
 by means of steamboats and canal boats. 
 
 While on this subject, it may be proper for me 
 to remark, that from three to five months in the 
 year the navigation of this river is obstructed by 
 bars and flats, producinggreat delay, expense, and 
 losses, preventing access to market, and affecting 
 vast and important interests connected with the 
 commerce of the river. There are twenty-eight 
 bars or flats between Lasalle.and the mouth of the 
 river, composed, some of thenQ of sand, and 
 others of mud, which could be easily .removed by 
 dredging, at an expense mostjnconsidera^le when 
 compared with expenses irf<Jurj>fl for removing 
 obstructions in harbors for the benefit of foreign 
 commerce; and when we consider that this stream 
 is a very important link in the chain of national 
 intercommunication which extends from the At¬ 
 lantic to New Orleans and Mobile, on the Gulf of 
 Mexico, it is of the highest national importance 
 that these obstructions should be removed. Con¬ 
 gress, by special enactment, once declared this j 
 stream a national highway; and it is as much en¬ 
 titled to the claim of nationality as the Mississippi 
 itself; for it is, for the purposes of commerce, a 
 direct extension of that very river, to meet the 
 mighty northern thoroughfare extending by rail¬ 
 way and the lakes, to the Atlantic ocean. 
 
 But, sir, the traveler along the canal not only 
 sees a new and flourishing commerce, but he sees 
 another object dearer to the patriot’s heart. He 
 sees every canal boat and steamer thronged with 
 travelers, citizens from every portion of our com¬ 
 mon country. Here he finds the Western man, 
 the Southern man, and, of course, “ Brother Jona¬ 
 than,” expressing their astonishment at the magic 
 and wonderful growth of that Western world of 
 ours, discussing stocks, finance, railroads, trade, 
 agriculture, corn, cotton, and codfish; the compro¬ 
 mise, secession, slavery, and, what is better, learn¬ 
 ing from each other that there is no good reason 
 for the local animosities which have heretofore n 
 existed and exhibited themselves in alarming as- j| 
 
 I pects, threatening to jar the pillars of the Union 
 and which, happily, the contact and collisions of 
 modern commerce and business intecourrse are fast 
 wearing away. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I feel like complimenting the 
 honorable gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
 Orr] for his lucid and eloquent speech in behalf of 
 the Missouri roads; and it is not for his eloquence 
 alone I thank him, but for his magnanimity. That 
 gentleman well knew that these roads did not point 
 to the South, but to the East; and that, while the 
 South would enjoy no direct benefit from their 
 construction, they would pour the rich treasures of 
 a new and valuable commerce into the commission 
 i houses of the Eastern cities. Yet, sir, he did not 
 pursue the illiberal policy of opposing grants for 
 these roads, because calculated to benefit the East 
 more directly than the South. I will say to that 
 honorable gentleman, I trust the day is not far 
 distant when, by means of the Illinois and Ala¬ 
 bama road, we can supply the South with the pro¬ 
 ductions of our Western farms, and receive in ex¬ 
 change the rice, cotton, and sugar of the South; 
 when the citizen of the South, flying from the heat 
 of a Southern sun, shall find a pleasant summer’s 
 retreat in our beautiful groves and prairies of the 
 West; and I tell that gentleman, if the halcyon 
 day predicted by my friend from Missouri [Mr. 
 Miller] shall ever come, when the young men of 
 the South shall intermarry with our beautiful daugh¬ 
 ters of the prairie, it will not be long till all their 
 notions of secession and disunion will be blown 
 sky high. A union of the descendants of Sumter 
 and Marion with those of Boone and the Western 
 pioneer, would be a union indeed, and, I think, 
 would be “ preserved for the sake of the Union.” 
 
 GRANTS FOR RAILROADS. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I do insist we have a right to 
 complain of the old States, because they refuse to 
 help us when they can do so without injuring them¬ 
 selves. We propose to give them all they ask for 
 the lands. If we build the roads, the Govern¬ 
 ment gets $2 50 per acre for the reserved alternate 
 sections, which is all it asks for the whole. If 
 we do not build the roads, we get none of the 
 lands—they revert to the Government. 
 
 The argument is, that the lands belong to all 
 the States—that they are a common fund. I admit 
 it. We do not propose to diminish the common 
 fund. Then is it not illiberal in the Represent¬ 
 atives of the old States to withhold from us a pos¬ 
 itive benefit when they lose nothing? The public 
 lands, you say, are common property. Let us 
 see what there is in this argument. Suppose that 
 a custom-house was needed in New York, or that 
 some obstruction in the harbor of that city required 
 to be removed, and the gentleman from New York 
 should bring forward a bill appropriating money 
 out of the Treasury, and I should say to him, “ Sir, 
 you must not take the money in the Treasury; it 
 is common property, and belongs to the people of 
 all the States, and you must not appropriate it to 
 these objects, unless in the same act of appropri¬ 
 ation you give to the State of Illinois an equal 
 amount for some object she may have in view.” 
 Why, if we can make no appropriations unless 
 they confer equal benefit on all the States, then 
 we can make none at all. The argument that, 
 
 1 being common property, the public lands cannot, 
 
 | therefore, be appropriated to great objects of pub- 
 
9 
 
 lie utility, because they happen to lie in a partic¬ 
 ular section, is an argument which, in the present 
 case, may pander to the cupidity of the Repre¬ 
 sentatives of the old States, and to their jealousy 
 of the West; but it is not very creditable to the 
 schools and colleges in which they were taught 
 the principles of logic. 
 
 There are paramount reasons why the Govern¬ 
 ment should make these grants. First, as a great 
 landholder; the Government, in the management 
 of its property, ought to exercise, as far as is 
 practicable, thesameprudence and foresight which 
 an individual under similar circumstances would. 
 An individual owning large tracts of forest or prai¬ 
 rie land, remote from settlement and market, and 
 valueless, would readily sell, or even give away, 
 a portion of said lands, to increase the value of 
 the residue; and especially, if by so doing he 
 could make that residue yield in a short time more 
 than the whole would in its unimproved condi¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Second, as a measure of economy, to hasten the 
 sales of the public lands, and thus at the earliest 
 period enable the Government to dispense with 
 the expensive machinery of land offices and other 
 disbursements incurred in the sale of said lands. 
 
 The sale of the public lands cannot be more ef¬ 
 fectually promoted than by opening roads through 
 them. Take the route from Burlington to Lafay¬ 
 ette, or from Springfield to Terre Haute, portions 
 of which run through large bodies of the public 
 lands—prairies extensive and untenanted, and dis¬ 
 tant from market—lands not. worth Government 
 price. Suppose that by an Almighty fiat, a river 
 straight as an arrow, unobstructed by snags or 
 bars, and navigable for steamers of the largest 
 class at all seasons of the year, should be run 
 through those beautiful and productive lands: 
 how long would it be before the Government 
 would sell every acre within a day’s travel of that 
 stream? How long before commerce would flap 
 her thousand sails upon that river ? How long 
 before its shores would resound with the roar of 
 steam and the rattle of machinery? How long 
 before its banks would teem with smiling villages, 
 and its broad acres bend beneath fields of waving 
 green, and the ripened harvest? Well, sir, the 
 railroad will produce the same results; yea, for all 
 the purposes of commerce, speed, and safety, the 
 railroad surpasses the river. 
 
 CLAIMS OF THE WEST. 
 
 The gentleman from New York [Mr. Bennett] 
 in his speech says: 
 
 “ In truth, it is a kind of a grab game, where each of the 
 new States gets all it can—the most selfish and clamorous 
 taking the largest share—while more than half of the States, 
 and two thirds of the population, are mere spectators to the 
 skill and rapacity which the twelve land States display in 
 taking the public lands.” 
 
 Rapacity !—This is a term applied to barbarians 
 and robbers. Sir, this comes well from the modest 
 State of New York. If there is anything that ever 
 will keep that State in the back ground, it is her 
 wonderful modesty. She never asks for anything. 
 She never gets anything. She is languishing to 
 death for want of some appropriations out of the 
 Federal Treasury. Now, sir, to be serious, I do 
 not complain of New York. I do not complain of 
 what she has got. As a citizen of this nation, I 
 am proud of the Empire State. I glory in her pros¬ 
 perity, in the Napoleon-like energies of her peo¬ 
 
 ple, and in that daring enterprise of her merchants 
 and tradesmen which has sent our flag into every 
 port, and planted the feet of our sailors on every 
 island of the sea; and I hope, sir, that the liberal 
 hand of the Government will ever be extended to 
 her in promoting our commerce with foreign na¬ 
 tions; but, sir, as a Western man, I hurl back 
 the charge of rapacity made against us for asking 
 grants of worthless wild lands to enable us to get 
 to her markets, and to swell the sails of her com¬ 
 merce. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, much consideration is due to 
 the new States. The old States came into the 
 Union proprietors of all the public lands within 
 their limits. Upon the separation of the Colonies 
 from the mother country, they succeeded to the 
 right of eminent domain, which, up to that time, 
 had existed in the Crown. They have received 
 the proceeds of these lands into their State treas¬ 
 uries, and they have been disbursed for the benefit 
 of their citizens. But not so with the new States. 
 In most of them the General Government is, to 
 this day, the proprietor of the larger portion of 
 the lands within their limits. These States, be¬ 
 fore their admission into the Union, were required 
 to subscribe to the conditions contained in the or¬ 
 dinance of 1787—“never to interfere with the 
 primary disposal of the soil;” and “ to impose no 
 tax on land the property of the United States;” 
 and in the acts of their admission into the Union 
 as States, they were required to subscribe to an¬ 
 other condition—“ that every tract of land sold by 
 ‘ the United States, after the day of their admis¬ 
 sion, should remain exempt from any tax for 
 ‘ State, county, township, or any purpose what- 
 ‘ ever, for the term of five years from and after the 
 ‘ day of sale.” The first condition is still in 
 force, and the latter remained in force until Jan¬ 
 uary, 1847, when Congress passed an act author¬ 
 izing the States admitted into the Union prior to 
 the 24th day of April, 1820, to tax the lands from 
 the day of sale. It is true, the United States gave 
 the sixteenth section; a township for a seminary 
 of learning; the saline lands, and two fifths of the 
 five per cent, of the proceeds of the public lands 
 to the State of Illinois in exchange for this immu¬ 
 nity from taxation. But it is very easy to show 
 that the State has lost several millions of dol¬ 
 lars more by this surrender of her sovereign right 
 to tax the lands than all she has obtained from 
 the concessions of the Government in considera¬ 
 tion for this immunity. 
 
 But, again: there is an equitable claim which 
 entitles the new States to some consideration. The 
 citizens of the new States have reclaimed the pub¬ 
 lic lands from the wilderness, and given them all 
 the value they possess. The actual settler, by his 
 labor and cultivation of the one hundred and sixty 
 acres he buys from the Government, gives value 
 to and brings into market the adjacent lands. 
 Every furrow made by his plow, every road he 
 opens, every bridge he builds, and every house 
 he erects, adds value to the adjacent Government 
 lands; and in Illinois, and in most of the new 
 States, the system of taxation being on the ad va¬ 
 lorem principle, the more he improves his lands 
 the higher are his taxes; but the General Govern¬ 
 ment being the largest proprietor, derives the full 
 benefit of these accessions of value, but pays no 
 taxes. 
 
 The reclamation of that vast territory west of 
 
10 
 
 the Alleghenies from the savage and the solitude 
 of the wilderness, is a high compliment to the ad¬ 
 venturous spirit of the pioneer, whose dauntless 
 courage has impelled him to encounter all the 
 vicissitudes of a frontier life, and to lay broad and 
 deep the foundation of great commonwealths in 
 these wild forests and untenanted prairies. The 
 settlement of the West is the grandest achieve¬ 
 ment of the age. An half century discloses a 
 magnificent empire, and the establishment of the 
 institutions of law, religion, and liberty on that 
 territory which, at the beginning of the Govern¬ 
 ment, had been consigned by prophecy as the per¬ 
 petual domain of the savage. 
 
 And what has the Government done ? It is true, 
 she has negotiated treaties with the Indians, but 
 by her Indian policy she has hedged up the path of 
 the pioneer from the frontiers of Virginia at each 
 successive advance to the Rocky mountains by 
 walls of wild Indians, who stand ready on the 
 border-line with the implements of death to mas¬ 
 sacre him, his wife, and children. By her land 
 policy she has wrung from the hard earnings of 
 the pioneer $1 25 per acre for redeeming her terri¬ 
 tory from savage occupation, and making farms 
 for her in the wilderness—that $1 25 to be drawn 
 into the abyss of the Treasury, to be expended 
 anywhere else than in the region of its acquisition. 
 The poor immigrant—the actual settler has fol¬ 
 lowed, with his axe in one hand and his gun in 
 the other, close on to the receding council-fire of 
 the Indian, leaving behind him all the conveni¬ 
 ences of society—destitute of schools and churches 
 —dwelling in rude log cabins, and exposed to 
 every conceivable danger and privation. He has 
 made your lands valuable, and paid you $1 25 
 per acre for them, which, instead of finding its 
 way into the State Treasury to be disbursed 
 among these settlers, has gone into the United 
 States Treasury, to be expended for the benefit of 
 foreign commerce. All your boasted liberality— 
 all your “ I would be generous to the new States,” 
 amounts to this, that out of your thousands of 
 millions of acres of public lands, you have granted 
 to the land States, for the purposes of internal im¬ 
 provements, only 11,500,395 acres. 
 
 RIVERS AND HARBORS. 
 
 Sir, the rivers and harbors of the West must 
 remain unimproved; her three hundred millions of 
 commerce and her ten millions of people must 
 have no protection; the lives and property of her 
 citizens must be sacrificed for the want of small 
 appropriations to remove the snags and bars from 
 her rivers; her vast stores of agricultural produc¬ 
 tions must rot in her barns for the want of small 
 portions of the public domain in aiding her to get 
 them to market; and this, too, when it is incon¬ 
 testably proven that the Government receives more 
 immediate benefits from the grants than the States 
 themselves. 
 
 From statistics taken by direction of the Treas¬ 
 ury Department, it appears that, in the year 1851, 
 67 vessels were lost on the inland lakes and rivers, 
 35 by tempest, and 32 by snags; 628 lives were 
 lost during that year, and the total value of prop¬ 
 erty destroyed was near two millions of dollars. 
 I noticed, the other day, a letter of a St. Louis 
 insurance company to pilots on the Mississippi 
 river, directing them to avoid a certain snag in the 
 channel of that stream, and stating that three fine 
 
 steamers had been sunk by striking that same 
 snag, at a sacrifice of $40,000. Now, if there was 
 any obstruction in any harbor on the sea-board, 
 how long would it be before Congress would make 
 an appropriation for its removal, and who would 
 vote for it more cheerfully than Representatives 
 from the West? On my way to this city, down 
 the Illinois and Mississippi, and up the Ohio 
 rivers, I saw scores of boats stationed on sand¬ 
 bars, making ineffectual efforts to proceed on their 
 journeys. The boat on which I was a passenger, 
 was detained twenty-four hours at the mouth of 
 the Cumberland river. Who, sir, is responsible 
 for these obstructions to commerce, expensive de¬ 
 lays, and immense sacrifices of life and property? 
 Let the party whose policy it has been to vote 
 down and veto every river and harbor bill, answer? 
 Why, sir, while we have been discussing the rel¬ 
 ative claims of “Young Fogy’*'[Mr. Douglas] 
 and “ Old Fogy,” [General Cass,] we could have 
 passed a x-iver and harbor bill, which would have 
 sent a gladsome thrill of joy throughout the mighty 
 Valley of the Mississippi. A small appropria¬ 
 tion—no burden on the Treasury—an amount we 
 would never miss, would clear out the snags and 
 deepen the channels of our Western rivers; would 
 rouse the young West, stimulate her enterprise, 
 and advance her prosperity! 
 
 There can be no question as to the obligation 
 which rests upon Congress to make these appro¬ 
 priations. The same clause of the Constitution 
 which confers upon her the power to protect life 
 and property upon the ocean, confers power to 
 protect life and property upon the lakes and rivers. 
 Congress voluntarily assumed this obligation in 
 the passage of the ordinance of 1787, which says: 
 
 “ The navigable waters leading into the Mississippi and 
 St. Lawrence, and the carrying places between them, shall 
 be common highways, and forever free to all of the citizens 
 of the United States, without any tax, impost, or duty 
 therefor.” 
 
 Congress having thus declared these rivers to be 
 common highways for all the States, and deprived 
 the States of any power to improve the same 
 by impost, tonnage duties, or other tax, she has 
 taken upon herself the irrevocable obligation to im¬ 
 prove them, and make them in truth “common 
 highways ” for the citizens of all the States. There 
 is no power in the States to make these improve¬ 
 ments. If it is replied that the States can do it 
 with the consent of Congress, then I rejoin that to 
 do it with consent is not power, it is permission. 
 And what State will undertake the enterprise? 
 “What is everybody’s business is nobody’s.” 
 What States will undertake, out of the moneys in 
 their treasuries, to make improvements in which 
 all the States have a common interest, and ought to 
 contribute their common share? 
 
 Is this Government not partial in its appropri¬ 
 ations? The golden regions of California are 
 scarcely in the Union, before millions are drawn 
 from the Treasury to connect New York and San 
 Francisco by ocean steamers. The Eastern emi¬ 
 grant, after a speedy journey in a floating palace, 
 finds himself safely harbored in the bay of San 
 Francisco, while the Western emigrant, in his ox 
 wagon, must pursue his weary and perilous pil¬ 
 grimage across mountains and wild deserts, and 
 fight his way through hordes of savages, who infest 
 his path at every step of his advance. For one 
 third of the money expended for steamers, the 
 
11 
 
 Government could open a national road between 
 the frontiers of Missouri and San Francisco, es¬ 
 tablish the necessary military posts, and station 
 companies of soldiers within convenient distances 
 all along the route. But the cries of distress 
 along that route, and the murders and depredations 
 committed, are far below the notice of Congress. 
 
 THE WEST—EXTENT AND RESOURCES. 
 
 It is time our brethren of the East had informed 
 themselves of the extent and resources of the West. 
 If they had, they would not look upon her States 
 either “ as spoiled children asking for what they 
 were not entitled,” or as Goths and Vandals, 
 “ seeking every opportunity to pillage the Treas¬ 
 ury.” To judge from the legislation of Congress, 
 one would infer that they look upon the mighty 
 Mississippi and all its tributaries as not entitled 
 to as much consideration as the most inconsider¬ 
 able harbor on the sea-board. If they would in¬ 
 form themselves, they would find, as the gentleman 
 from Ohio [Mr. Campbell] says, that “ we had 
 some country, and some people there.” Take your 
 stand at the mouth of the Missouri, and look up 
 to its source, 3,217 miles, up the Illinois 400 miles, 
 the Ohio 1,000 miles, and the mighty Mississippi, 
 the great trunk of all, as she sweeps her turbid 
 waters 3,500 miles, from her headland home in the 
 wilderness to the Gulf—traverse the valleys of the 
 Wabash, the Kaskaskia, the Rock, the Iowa, the 
 Des Moines, the Wisconsin, the St. Peters, and you 
 will find there is some territory there. An accu¬ 
 rate historian of the West, the Rev. Mr. Peck, 
 informs us that, “ The Mississippi and Ohio, and 
 ‘ their tributary waters, form an inland navigation 
 ‘ exceeding twenty thousand miles, for various 
 ‘ classes of boats, during two thirds of the year, 
 ‘ to the point of junction at Cairo; from thence to 
 ‘ New Orleans the river is navigable for the whole 
 ‘ year for boats of the largest class.” There are 
 broad valleys there; mighty lakes and rivers, and 
 beautiful prairies; mines of inexhaustible wealth; 
 mountains of iron; vast beds of lead, zinc, and 
 copper, and “ coal enough to keep the hearth fires 
 of the world bright for a thousand centuries.” But, 
 sir, there is also there, the sure and durable element 
 of wealth, the soil, a rich and productive soil—a 
 soil producing, with little labor, and in great abun¬ 
 dance, those staple articles which promote the sub¬ 
 sistence, as well as constitute the commerce of the 
 world. Agriculture produces the raw material, 
 commerce distributes it, manufactures prepare it 
 for use. But, sir, the latter depend on the former. 
 Agriculture is the only unfailing basis of wealth. 
 The proudest emporiums are liable to decay by the 
 opening of new ways or the diversions of the 
 channels of trade; but these channels of trade, go 
 where they will, they depend for their life-blood 
 upon the productions of agriculture. 
 
 ‘‘While trade’s proud empire hastes to swift decay, 
 And ocean sweeps the labored mole away, 
 
 This self-dependent power shall time defy, 
 
 As rocks resist the billows and the sky.” 
 
 The West is progressing rapidly in commercial 
 prosperity. In the year 1811 the first steam-boat 
 was launched on our western waters. On the 1st 
 day of July, 1851, there were on the inland lakes 
 and rivers seven hundred and sixty-five steam¬ 
 boats, with an average tonnage of 204,613, and 
 carrying 6,000,000 of passengers, and with an ag¬ 
 gregate annual commerce of $300,000,000, exceed¬ 
 
 ing the whole amount of our commerce with for¬ 
 eign nations. 
 
 To show the rapid advance and relative position 
 of the West in the construction of railroads, I 
 have gleaned the following statistics from a table 
 published by the Railway Times: 
 
 In the United States. 
 
 Total number of railroads. 337 
 
 Number of miles in operation. 11,565 
 
 Number of miles in course of construction... 11,228 
 
 Cost of roads completed.$335,150,848 
 
 Average cost per mile. $28,979 
 
 In the Valley of the Mississippi. 
 
 Total number s of railroads. 103 
 
 Miles in operation. 2,826 
 
 Miles in course of construction. 7,506 
 
 Cost of roads completed. $50,531,435 
 
 Cost per mile. $17,845 
 
 In Illinois. 
 
 Total number of roads. 18 
 
 Miles in operation. 246 
 
 In course of construction. 2,246 
 
 Thus it appears that the West has already one 
 third as many roads as all the States, and nearly 
 three fourths of all the roads in the course of con¬ 
 struction in the whole Union. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, the population of the Valley of 
 the Mississippi already constitutes more than one 
 third of the entire population of the Union. And, 
 sir, the time is not distant when the seat of em¬ 
 pire, the strong-hold of numerical power, will 
 be west of the Alleghanies. The handwriting is 
 on the wall. It is manifest destiny, sir. It is writ¬ 
 ten on the signs of the times in clear, fresh, and 
 unmistakable lines. And then, sir, her Repre¬ 
 sentatives will stand on this floor clothed with the 
 power to demand, and not to beg, like crouching 
 mendicants, for justice. But, sir, when her voice 
 shall be potential here, I believe, and trust, it will 
 not be felt in partiality or oppression; but with a 
 high and patriotic regard for the interests of the 
 whole country, she will sympathize with, and 
 cheerfully cooperate in, every measure for the com¬ 
 mon prosperity, without regard to section or local¬ 
 ity. She will then try and establish the proposition, 
 that three hundred millions of commerce on the 
 lakes and rivers is entitled to protection, as well 
 as the same amount on the ocean; and that the 
 life of a man on the Mississippi is worth at least 
 one fifth part of the life of a man on the Atlantic. 
 
 What has the West done? Has she not con¬ 
 tributed her equal share to the support of the Gov¬ 
 ernment? Has she not cheerfully voted every ap¬ 
 propriation for the support of the Army, Navy— 
 for the protection of our foreign commerce—with¬ 
 out inquiring what particular sections it was most 
 to benefit? And when the country has required 
 the services of its citizen soldiery, who has sought 
 the field with more alacrity? Let the history of 
 the country answer. The West can point to 
 many a battle-field in the war of 18]2, and in the 
 Mexican war, which will stand forever as the im¬ 
 perishable monuments of the prowess of her sons. 
 And yet, sir, they claim only, in common with 
 their countrymen everywhere, to have done their 
 duty, and nothing more; and they ask only equal 
 consideration at the hands of this Government. 
 
 THE ROADS THROUGH ILLINOIS. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I have not time to present the 
 claims of the various roads for which grants have 
 been asked, and which pass through the State of 
 Illinois. The Burlington and Lafayette road, the 
 
12 
 
 extension of the Alton and Sangamon road to 
 Bloomington, connecting St. Louis and Chicago ' 
 by the most direct line, and the Cincinnati and 
 St. Louis road are most important thorough¬ 
 fares; and when these measures come up, I will, 
 if I can get the floor, present their claims to the 
 best of my ability. 1 would not have the com¬ 
 mittee infer that we expect to get grants for all the 
 roads asked for, for, as Mr. Douglas said in the 
 Senate, this is out of the question. We, of course, 
 will expect the House to select from all the roads 
 brought before it such as present the strongest 
 claims to the consideration of Congress. As the 
 bill introduced by my friend from Indiana [Mr. 
 Davis] will probably first come up for consider¬ 
 ation, I will say a few words as to the route it I 
 proposes. This is an extension of the Hannibal 
 and St. Joseph road eastward to Terre Haute. 
 From the Mississippi to the Illinois rivers a road 
 is now in process of construction. From the Illi¬ 
 nois river to Springfield a road has been in oper¬ 
 ation for several years. It is now proposed to 
 grant alternate sections of the public lands for six 
 miles on each side of the road, to extend it to Terre 
 Haute, a distance of one hundred miles. From 
 Terre Haute to Indianapolis a road is in opera¬ 
 tion, and thence to Columbus a road is in pro¬ 
 cess of construction, and from this pointa choice 
 of routes can be shortly had to any of the Eastern 
 cities. The importance of this road can be seen at 
 a glance. St. Joseph, Quincy, Springfield, In- 
 dianoplis, Columbus, and Philadelphia are all on 
 the parallel of latitude forty, running through the 
 geographical center of all these States, equidistant 
 from the lakes on the north and the rivers on 
 the south, through the finest agricultural districts 
 in the world; it is the short, central, and conve¬ 
 nient route of the cities of the East to the Missis¬ 
 sippi and the Missouri, and at a future day, to the 
 Pacific ocean. I verily believe that this is the 
 route which is destined to bear on its long lines 
 that majestic procession of the commerce of the 
 continents of Europe, America, and Asia. Per¬ 
 haps not- a century will elapse before the citi¬ 
 zens of Springfield, Illinois, will see in the same 
 train of cars the merchant of Liverpool, New 
 York, San Francisco, and Pekin; and that trade 
 which built up Babylon and enriched Holland, 
 and which has been the theme of British eloquence 
 for centuries, will find its natural channel over the 
 Rocky Mountains and the prairies of the West. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I shall conclude what I have to 
 say by expressing the hope that in our legislation 
 upon the public lands we will not be governed by 
 the narrow considerations of sectional jealousy. 
 Are the railroads for which we ask grants, for the 
 benefit alone of any particular section? Do they 
 not open new and profitable markets for your 
 cities? Are they not outlets for your merchan¬ 
 dise and the fabrics of your manufactories? And 
 do they not bring the productions of the mighty 
 West, cheapened and in greater abundance to 
 your doors? Do they not freight your own roads 
 and canals, build up your cities, and laden your ! 
 ships with the cargoes of valuable commerce? A 
 railroad in Illinois, like a light-house on the sea- 
 coast, is the common property of the nation. 
 Shall we adopt the policy that we will pass no | 
 measure unless it confers equal benefits on every 
 section of the country? Then, sir, we can pass 
 none. Then, sir, stop all appropriations for cus-1 
 
 tom-houses, ocean steamers, and coast surveys; 
 for these add to your wealth, these make your 
 merchant princes, these swell the sails of your f 
 commerce, while we share their benefits in an in¬ 
 direct and incidental way only. But I trust, Mr. 
 Chairman, the West will never oppose an appro¬ 
 priation for the “ general welfare or common de¬ 
 fense,” because the locality of that appropriation *1 
 may receive especial advantage from it. What¬ 
 ever benefits the East or South is our benefit—if 
 not for our benefit, it is for the nation, and that’s 
 enough. The ocean steamer that plows the deep, 
 it is enough for us that she bears aloft our stars 
 and stripes, and displays to the world the com¬ 
 merce, power, and renown of our country. It is 
 enough for us that she bears the trident of the 
 seas, and outstrips the power 
 
 11 Whose flag has braved a thousand years 
 The battle and the breeze.” 
 
 Away, then, sir, forever away with arguments 
 like those of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. 
 Bennett,] addressed to our sectional prejudices 
 and local cupidity. We have one country; our 
 interests are one, our history is one; our destiny 
 is the same—a glorious destiny of free and sover¬ 
 eign States to unexampled power and renown. 
 
 The same flag that flashes its stars to the sun on 
 the banks of the Hudson and Potomac is hailed 
 by millions of rejoicing freemen on the banks of 
 the Mississippi and the Columbia. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I confess I was delighted the 
 other day at the vivid description given by the 
 gentleman from New York [Mr. Brooks] of the 
 extent of our newly-acquired possessions, and the 
 vast area of our country. Within the last five 
 years three new States have been added to the 
 Union, and there is the territory at the head of the 
 Missouri and the Arkansas, the Territories of Ne¬ 
 braska, New Mexico, Utah, and Oregon—and the 
 vision of an ocean-bound Republic is now a reality. 
 
 Sir, what a mighty theater for American enter¬ 
 prise ! What a mighty course for the race of dem¬ 
 ocratic liberty ! 
 
 The gentleman from New York informed us 
 that we had upon the frontiers an army of 12,311 
 men, 118 military posts, and 6,800 miles of fron¬ 
 tier requiring our protection. Now, sir, who can 
 doubt that railroads, enabling us to concentrate at 
 given points our Army and munitions of war at the 
 shortest notice, will be a more reliable and surer 
 defense than thousands of military posts and forti¬ 
 fications? And, sir, when we have united the 
 Atlantic and the Mississippi, our oceans, lakes, and 
 rivers, by these iron bands of commerce, we shall 
 have stronger and more impregnable bonds of 
 union “ than all the constitutions which man ever 
 formed.” This, sir, will be a new era—an era, 
 not only of commerce, which is an exchange of 
 commodities, but also of the exchange of ideas, 
 the rapid transmission of thought—the birth of a 
 literature commensurate with this mighty theater 
 of action—a progression in science, art, and po¬ 
 litical economy and diplomacy pari passu with this 
 new power of locomotion. Wherever the iron 
 horse travels, he will carry, not only the rich pro¬ 
 ductions of our soil, but our laws, our liberty, and 
 our religion. Flying over the rivers and moun¬ 
 tains and wild deserts, it will realize the bright 
 vision of Isaiah: “ The valleys shall be exalted, the 
 mountains laid low, and straight in the desert, 
 shall be made a highway for our God.” 
 
13 
 
 It is already our boast as a nation, sir, that we 
 enjoy more of liberty, a more universal diffusion 
 of knowledge, and a more exalted national char¬ 
 acter than any nation on the globe. But the stri¬ 
 king feature of the American character is its en¬ 
 terprise—an enterprise that knows no obstacles, 
 counts no costs, fears no dangers, triumphs over 
 all obstacles. Look at California—three thousand 
 miles away in the wild deserts, and mountains 
 and savages between. And yet, sir, a young 
 empire is there—a sovereign State, she has her 
 Representative on this floor, who delights us with 
 his eloquence; and who, to quote my friend from 
 Kentucky, [Mr. Breckinridge,] is ready to turn 
 the world upside down with his brilliant notions 
 of “ young fogyism,” “young America,” and 
 “ manifest destiny.” 
 
 But, sir, the most felicitous thought is now, that 
 the fears of disunion growing out of the increased 
 extension of territory no longer alarms the patriot. 
 It will be no matter how far Charleston is from 
 New York when, sir, they can have constant 
 communication with each other in a few days. 
 Rome, by her military powers, spread her empire ' 
 
 J over the world; and her eagles winged their tri¬ 
 umphant flight over conquered provinces; but these 
 ; provinces were beyond the reach of the Roman 
 lawgiver. The eloquence of Cicero thundered in 
 the forum, but it reached no further than the ears 
 of the conscript fathers and the Roman populace. 
 But not so with us, when the message of the 
 President can be read in the most distant State on 
 the day of its delivery. Not so with us, when 
 we travel by steam, print by electricity, and talk 
 by lightning. 
 
 Then, sir, with the proper application of the re¬ 
 sources that belong to us, and a faithful develop¬ 
 ment of the true principles of our freedom, we 
 may look forward, fearless of disunion, to the 
 magnificent destiny which awaits us,—a nation 
 renowned in arts and arms, her institutions of be¬ 
 nevolence and public works the wonder of the 
 world—her republican example the beacon light 
 to light up the world to freedom! 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I see that my time is about ex¬ 
 pired, and I close by thanking the committee for 
 the attention it has accorded me to what I have 
 offered for its consideration. 
 
4 
 
 
 i