JUNE 30, 1832.] Public Lands. [SENATE. very last importance: this bill, together with the report thing like gratuity or donation in the grant of the three which accompanied it, has been drawn with great care, per cent. fund for internal improvement, or in the grant and contains, apparently, much plausible argument and of the two townships for a seminary of learning, or in the sound reasoning, and both have been supported by forci- reservation of the sixteenth section in each township for ble and eloquent speeches by the honorable Senator from private schools. Sir, these were the grants in which the Kentucky, [Mr. CLAY,] and the honorable Senator from old States have already enjoyed an equal participation; Ohio, [Mr. EwING.] But, sr, I must be permitted to say they were made to encourage emigration, and to enhance that the provisions contained in this bill, and the views the price of the public domain, and these effects have taken by the report accompanying it, (though very impos-been produced. The citizen, emigrating from the old ing,) are utterly adverse to the interests of the new States. States to the new, finds the means of education in the viI cannot give my sanction to this bill, because it not only cinity of the university more in his reach; he concludes, fails to dispense equal justice to the new States, but con- of course, that it is an inducement to locate himself in this tains provisions which carry certain ruin and destruction to quarter; and, for this conside: ation, he gives a higher price their most valuable interests. It is true the provision for his lands; and, in like manner, when, by accident, the which proposes to give the new States ten per cent. of the sixteenth section proves to be a valuable one, he is led to proceeds of the public lands for five years, assumes the give a higher price for lands in this township, by reason appearance of liberality; but it is equally true that this of the prospects it affords of educating his children upon is a g Ided pill, which, if taken, will prove the most fatal good terms; but this sixteenth section which has been poison. For, let it be understood that this proposition is spoken of so often as a gratuity or donation, is only reconnected with the one which gives to all the States their served from sale promiscuously, not selected, and, of proportion of the proceeds of the public lands, according course, it often happens (probably nine times out of ten) to their federal representation; now, adopt this provision, that it proves to be utterly valueless, located in a swamp and the fate of the new States will be sealed forever; their or marsh, nobs of mountains, or pine woods, not worth interest may then be said to be in the hands of hard one cent. Where is this liberality, then? taskmasters," truly. Can any person be ignorant of the But let us admit that these were designed as an equiva fact that then it will be the interest of the old States to lent for the concession made by the new States, in exoppose every proposition for a reduction of the price, or empting the public domain from taxation, and the land pre-emption rights, and every application for relief, of any sold by the Government to individuals for five years after character whatever, in order that they may be enabled to their sale. Then, we say, that not only have the new realize the greatest possible speculation And, in that States given an equivalent, but ten times the amount of that event, the honorable Senator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY] value, in thus exempting the lands from taxation; and this will be relieved from bestowing any further encomiums is capable of mathematical demonstration, provided any upon the very liberal enactinents in favor of the new person will take the trouble to ascertain the amount which States; for I would venture the assertion, that acts of that would be realized, as a tax upon the lands exempted, at character would never, thereafter, grace your statute the rate which is imposed upon the lands of other citi books. But, in that event, what States will be the great-zens. est beneficiaries, let me ask? The same, sir, which derive But this is not all; in doing this, the new States have the greatest benefit from the tariff and pension bill; parted with a portion of their sovereignty, by which the while Alabama, a State wh ch will furnish between twenty- General Government establishes land offices and exercises five and thirty millions of acres of the public domain, to ownership over the soil within their jurisdict on; by means be divided in the mode proposed, will receive about fifty-of which there exists a continual drain of all the circulatsix thousand dollars per annum; the State of Pennsylvania ing medium from the new States into the public coffers will receive two hundred and eighty-eight thousand one here. Is this nothing? hundred and seventy-six dollars; and that of New York But the proposition embraced in his communication to four hundred and ten thousand one hundred and twenty-the General Assembly, by the late Governor of Illinois, eight dollars, (for I throw away fractions and cents.) Sir, and which was afterwards submitted on this floor, claimwill this do justice to Virginia and Georgia, whose liberality, ing, in behalf of the new States, the fee simple estate in I believe, gave all the territory out of which the new the public domain, has been denounced and censured. As States have been composed, with the exception of Loui- regards the proposition made here, and the individual who siana and Missouri? But Virginia is consistent with her-brought it forward, both have been sufficiently defended self--magnanimous Virginia gave an empire, without and complimented by the chairman of the Committee on counting dollars and cents, or claiming an equivalent; she Public Lands, [Mr. KING,] whose duty it was to render now forbears entering into this general scramble for any this tribute of justice. I will only say, sir, that, however portion of the proceeds of the public domain, although wise the project, or able the effort in its support, here she has a more legitimate claim than any other of the old it did not receive the least countenance. And if the obStates in the Union. ject was to produce excitement among the people as an But it has been asserted that this Government has ex-electioneering scheme in Alabama, it failed to produce hibited great liberality and parental kindness towards the this desired effect. new States, in the various enactments in their favor, &c. But as regards the censure upon the late Governor To a certain extent, I agree this is so; but not to that ex-of Illinois, for having become a whole hog landmontent gentlemen have contended for. ger," I think the honorable Senator from Kentucky [Mr. I acknowledge the liberality of the General Govern- CLAY] has not, in this instance, observed his usual courment, as regards the relief measures by which she has ex- tesy, Liberal.ty, or magnanimity, towards an absent advertended towards a meritorious class of public debtors, the sary. Sir, I have the Governor's communication made to the purchasers of public lands, the favor of taking the lands General Assembly on this subject, and I cannot but think, purchased at a far price, and saving them from the for- if the honorable Senator will read it with attention, and difeiture of both land and money paid towards it, which vest himself of prejudice, he will agree with me in opimight have proved ruinous to this portion of her citizens, but could not have resulted to the benefit of the Government. But, sir, I deny, as one of the representatives of a new State, that there was any liberality in the terms pro- But gentlemen say we have complained, and for this posed and conditions exacted, upon which we were re- we have been censured in no unmeasured terms. Sir, is ceived into the Federal Union. I deny that there was any it a crime, or disreputable for those who, while in a nion, that it detracts nothing from the high character that gentleman occup.es (and deservedly occupies) in public estimation, for talent and capacity of the first order. SENATE.] Public Lands. [JUNE 30, 1832. is my deliberate and conscientious belief that it is not only the correct policy, but the duty of the Government, to make to every individual who is destitute, and the head of a family, a donation of a quarter section of land, on condition that he shall cultivate and improve it; and that this liberal policy would result advantageously alike to the citizens and the Government. state of minority, have been overreached, to complain of within the reach of this class of citizens to purchase; and that imposition, when they arrive at full age, by which whether, as patriots, they cannot demand it as a right of advantage has been taken of their minority? their Government. They are willing to give a high price What, sir, was the situation of the parties at the time of for that which is a drug on your hands, to reclaim the entering into the compact? They were in a territorial wilderness and forests by their labor; they are willing to form of Government; in a state of vassalage, deprived of make that valuable which is worthless, by their labor; all political rights and privileges; ruled and governed by they are willing to bring into active operation the latent foreigners; their governors, secretaries, and judges, sent resources of the country. Sir, to such of the citizens of from other States. On this floor they had no representa- this country I consider a freehold to be his natural inherittive or voice, and in the other branch, in the humiliated ance; to such, a portion of the public domain should be situation of having a delegate with the power of present- as free as the atmosphere, or the light of heaven. Sir, it ing petitions and memorials, but not entrusted to give a vote on any question whatever. The Governor of these territories, too, possessing as much power over the people as a king or monarch over his subjects. I allude to that prerogative which gives the power to prorogue and dissolve territorial legislative assemblies, which, strange as it may appear, has been exercised on more than one occasion. Well, sir, to be relieved from this tyrannical and op- But we have been called upon to "state what we mean pressive form of Government, the people were induced by by refuse lands." I answer, that land which has been in their representatives in convention to adopt the ordinance market for twenty or thirty years, and has not found a according to the terms proposed, by which they received purchaser; lands which have been picked and culled for admission into the federal family. But in doing this they that length of time; lands situated in swamps and marshes, have made great sacrifices, and given too high a price for embracing mountains, cedar nobs, pine woods, and pine the boon. And gentlemen would deprive them of the barrens; lands which, without some improvement, are unconsolation even of complaining. Suppose a minor im-fit for any agricultural purpose whatever, are truly “reprudently pledges his valuable patrimonial estate to a fuse," not worth the present minimum, and that their "Shylock," and by this means it is arrested out of his pos- price ought to be reduced. session when he arrives at maturity and discovers the imposition, will the honorable Senator say that it would be disreputable," provided he should complain that the "pound of flesh" should be required of him under such circumstances? Now, sir, a few words in favor of the bill reported by the Committee on Public Lands, and the very able report which accompanied it. Sir, it constitutes no objection with me that the committee have thought proper to avail themselves of the important services of the honorable Senator from Missouri, and that his labors have entered largely into this production--they could not have drawn upon a source better qualified to render valuable aid. Sir, I approve of the bill proposed by the Committee on Public Lands, because, in substance, it is the project brought forward some years since by the honorable Senator from Missouri, and for which he has obtained deserved celebrity in all the new States. Sir, I approve of it, because I think it recommends itself to our favor for many considerations; it proportions the price of the public domain to its quality, and adapts the terms of purchase to all classes of citizens; it enables the poor man as well as the rich to become a freeholder. And where can man find a welcome like a permanent home? A sanctuary which he is inclined to worship, so much as his own domicil? One which is so well calculated to make him proud of his species, and proud of the country in which he lives, and which will prompt him, upon all proper occasions, to be ready to defend it with his life? Mr. President, said Mr. M., I will not detain the Senate longer; the subject has been ably discussed by gentlemen who have preceded me; but its importance, in connexion with the interests of those whom I represent, seems to have demanded thus much. In conclusion, Mr. M. expressed his wish that the deci sion on the final question would not be urged until several Senators, who were now absent, and who were interested in the measure, should be present. Mr. CLAY then rose in reply, and spoke briefly against indefinite postponement, expressing a wish that, in preference to this mode of disposing of the subject, the whole of the land subject should rather be postponed until the next session. Mr. POINDEXTER thought that indefinite postpone ment was an uncourteous way of getting rid of the subject, without giving any decision as to the merits of the report of the Committee on Public Lands. Mr. KANE said it would be wrong to take the vote on indefinite postponement to-night, as the Senate was thin. He would therefore move to lay the bill on the table. After some further conversation, the question was taken on laying the bill on the table, and negatived, as follows: YEAS.--Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Ellis, Grundy, Hill, Kane, King, Mangum, Marcy, Moore, Robinson, Smith, Tazewell, White.--15. NAYS.--Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Dallas, Dickerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Herdricks, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Miller, Naudain, Poin dexter, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, Tipton, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Webster, Wilkins.--27. The question then being on the indefinite postponement, the yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. KING complained of the want of courtesy in pressing the motion now. But it has been said, and correctly, too, that in this country we have too much land for the population of the country. Can a better argument be adduced in favor of reducing the price, and adapting the terms to the condi- Mr. WEBSTER replied that there could be no want tion of the people to purchase? From the official docu- of courtesy in pressing this question. It was clear, from ment which has been referred to, it appears there are in the the late vote, that a decided majority of the Senate were new States one hundred and forty or fifty thousand per- against laying the bill on the table. As there was a resosons destitute of lands. I submit it to honorable gentle-lution from the House to adjourn on Monday week, which men whether it would not be consistent with sound prin- resolution was to be taken up on Thursday, he thought it ciples of propriety and justice, that a portion of these right that the discussion should proceed, or the question millions of acres, which gentlemen advise the propriety of be taken. holding up for three hundred years, in order to realize a The question was then taken on the motion for indefi good price, should not be reduced and brought down nite postponement, and decided in the negative, as follows JULY 2, 1832.] The Tariff.--Public Lands. [SENATE. YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Ellis, Grundy, of the lands to colonization, internal improvement, or Hill, Kane, King, Mangum, Marcy, Miller, Moore, Robin- education; because all that was added to the mind or the son, Smith, Tazewell, Tipton, White.--17. improvement of a State was an addition to the aggregate intellect and wealth of the whole. NAYS.--Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Dallas, Dickerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Hendricks, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Naudain, Poindexter, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Webster, Wilkins.--25. The Senate then adjourned. MONDAY, JULY 2. THE TARIFF. Mr. BENTON said that if this bill was to be pushed through at the present session, the amendment directed by the Committee on Public Lands to be made to the tariff bill would be moved to this bill, to test the sense of the Senate as to the reduction of this heavy tax on the new States of the West. It should be determined by a direct vote, whether the new States, besides the support of the General Government, were to be saddled with the of the rest. Mr. DICKERSON from the Committee on Manufac-support of all the twenty-four States, and to be the spoil tures, reported the bill from the House of Representatives in addition to the act imposing duties on imports, with a variety of amendments; which were ordered to be printed. Mr. DICKERSON gave notice that he should move the Senate to-day to take up the bill. PUBLIC LANDS. The Senate then proceeded to consider the bill to appropriate, for a limited time, the proceeds of the sales of the public lands. The question pending being on the amendment proposed by the Committee on Public Lands to strike out "ten," and insert "fifteen" per cent., to be appropriated to the new States, tor from Missouri was determined to bring forward the Mr. CLAY said he was very glad to hear that the Senawhole subject. "Come on Macduff." He had been desirous to have the whole subject disposed of; and if there was time for this general action during this session, he was anxious that it should take place. Mr. POINDEXTER made some remarks in opposition to the Senator from Missouri, on the point that the new States were the spoils and the oppressed of the other States. He stated that the sales of the public lands on the Choctaw purchase in Mississippi would be opened next fall, and if he, in an ill humor because he could not get all he wanted, should vote for postponing this subject Mr. CLAY explained the operation of the amendment. to another year, his constituents would lose the benefit of Mr. GRUNDY said, if it was the intention of gentlemen the fifteen per cent. on the lands then to be offered for to carry this measure through at the present session, he sale. He could not place himself in that position before would, although reluctantly, go with them. He thought his constituents. the subject should be considered at home, before it was submitted to Congress. It was now for the first time brought here. He should now vote against the amendment, in the hope that the proceedings of the Senate on the subject would stop here, and that it would not be attempted to be urged through at this late period of the session. He put a question to the Committee on Public Lands, if they intended to push the question through. He thought that to give the new States fifteen, or even ten per cent. additional, without going any further, would be extravagant. Mr. CLAY said he not only wished to get through the question this session, but he wished to get the bill through this day; and, as far as he was in possession of the opinions of members, he thought this might be done; if not to-day, he hoped the bill would be got through tomorrow, and that the tariff would in that case be postponed until this should be decided; or, after the tariff should be disposed of, that this bill would be taken up and passed. He concurred with the Senator from Tennessee, that if this whole subject could not be disposed of, it ought not to be decided in part. But he expressed his desire to act on the subject without further delay. Mr. KING said he was himself opposed to the per cent. age as it was reported. He was instructed not to press the reduction of the price of lands in this bill. He referred to the hardship which he alleged to bear on the new States, by their compact with the General Government, and which he said was admitted by the Senator from Kentucky. Mr. GRUNDY adverted to the impossibility of getting through this question in the two weeks, or one week, which Congress may have to sit. He wished to get through the unfinished business which ought to be acted upon. If this bill was to be put aside, he would also vote to postpone the other bill from the Committee on Public Lands, for the reduction of the price of the public lands. But if this bill were to be passed upon, the action on the other could not be prevented. If gentlemen, however, were so eager to get at a discussion, let them go at it; but he thought that two weeks hence they would regret that they had done so. Mr. KING asserted that although the dividend now given to the new States out of the sales of public lands professed to be five per cent., it was in fact but three per cent., as the additional two per cent. was to be directed to the making of roads to and from the lands. He stated that he would not vote for this bill, even if the dividend were to be raised to twenty-five per cent. to the new States. He would not be bribed to give his support to this bill. Mr. POINDEXTER asked if the gentleman from Alabama was bribed when he obtained 400,000 acres for his State. He repelled the idea that either he himself, or other Senators, were to be laid under the imputation of being bribed; and stated that although public lands had been on sale in Mississippi for thirty years, that State had received nothing from the General Government. He desired to act on this bill during the present session. Mr. JOHNSTON expressed himself in favor of going Mr. CLAY corrected the Senator from Alabama as to through with this bill at the present session; and replied the opinions attributed to him. He had never admitted to the several objections which had been urged against the existence of hardship, but merely of complaint, and action upon it. He contended that, in looking so intently for that complaint he denied that there was any good at the reduction of the price of the public lands, there foundation. He stated that, if the lands were to be ceded was danger of loosing the advantages promised by this bill, to the States, they would still be exempted from taxation, while, after all, there was no certainty that the price as no State had ever taxed its own lands. He inquired if would be reduced. the Government was not justified in making as much Mr. BENTON insisted on the probability of the pasas could be made from the public lands, without unfair-sage of a bill to reduce the price of the public lands, ness to the new States. He showed the superiority of the should this bill fail. principle and mode of distribution adopted by the report Mr. JOHNSTON replied that the principle of reducof the Committee on Manufactures. He stated that all tion was not at all at war with the principle of distribution the Union was interested in the application of the proceeds of the proceeds. The question was then taken on the amendment, and decided as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Buckner, Hendricks, Kane, Moore, Poindexter, Robinson, Ruggles, Tipton. -10. NAYS.-Messrs. Bell, Brown, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Dallas, Dickerson, Dudley, Ellis, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Grundy, Hayne, Hill, Holmes, Johnston, King, Knight, Mangum, Marcy, Miller, Naudain, Prentiss, Robbins, Seymour, Silsbee, Smith, Sprague, Tazewell, Tomlinson, Troup, Tyler, Waggaman, White, Wilkins. -36. (JULY 2, 184 Mr. POINDEXTER dissented from many of the pos tions taken by the Senator from South Carolina, who had stated his disposition to befriend the new States, yet re fused either to cede the lands to the new States, or to make donations of lands to them. The debate was further continued by Messrs. JOHNS TON, KANE, HOLMES, and ROBINSON; when t question was taken on Mr. HAYNE's motion, and decided as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Buckner, El Grundy, Hayne, Hll, Kane, King, Mangum, Marey, M ler, Moore, Robinson, Smith, Tazewell, Troup, Tyler, White.-21. NAYS.--Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Dickerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Hendricks Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Naudain, Pondex'er, Pres tiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, Sprague, To ton, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Webster, Wilkins.--26. Mr. SMITH moved that the Senate now adjourn. Negatived-yeas 15, nays 32. Mr. HAYNE moved to strike out the words which pro vide for the distribution of the proceeds among the States. He was opposed to the introduction of the principle of distributing the revenue among the States. He insisted that the proceeds of the public lands did constitute a par of the revenue. The clause which he moved to strike out, cut off a part of the public revenue, taking it from the treasury to divide it among the States. He made a objection to the distribution also, because it was a division of the gross, instead of the nett revenue, and so far as the difference between the gross and nett proceeds, it was a division of the duties derived from imports. He admit ted the perfect power of Congress to legislate on the subject; but he was opposed to donations of money to the YEAS. Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Buckner, El States, and desired to have some general and equitable Forsyth, Grundy, Hayne, Hill, Kane, King, Margut, system adopted for the disposition of the public lands. | Miller, Moore, Robinson, Smith, Tazewell, Tipton, Troph He asked for the yeas and nays on his motion; which Tyler, White.-21. were ordered. The question now being on the proposition of the Committee on Public Lands to strike out all the sect which authorize the distribution among the States, and the residue of the bill, the question was then takeaiȚ yeas and nays, and decided as follows: NAYS.--Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Dickerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Henri eka, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Marcy, Naudain, Poindexter, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, S lsbee, Sprague, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Webster, Wilkins.-26. Mr. BENTON then moved to introduce an additional section to reduce the price of public lands to one de per acre, and of all which have been above five years a market fifty cents per acre. Mr. CLAY said he rejoiced that the question of the principle of distribution was now to be tested in a simple and a solemn manner. He met the opinion of the Senator from South Carolina, that the division of the proceeds of the public lands would lead to the practice of distributing the proceeds of the taxes among the States, by an opposite one; and declared his own firm and strenuous opposition to the princ ple of such distribution. He stated that the revenue from the public lands was distinguished from all other revenue by the language of the constitution, and of the deeds of cession, which gave exclusive and unlimited power to Congress over the public lands, YEAS.-Messrs. Bell, Benton, Bibb, Brown, Buckret, and which was not given over any other revenue. Ellis, Grundy, Hayne, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King, Ma view was supported by the opinions of some of the ablest gum, Moore, Poindexter, Robinson, Smith, Tazewel of our constitutional lawyers; and if it was correct, the Tipton, Troup, White.-21. This On motion of Mr. KANE, the question was divided, d was first taken on the first branch of the amendment, negatived, as follows: argument, therefore, that the division of this revenue NAYS.--Messrs. Chambers, Clay, Clayton, D would lead to the division of all the surplus revenue, he Dickerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Forsyth, Frelingh did not consider as sustainable. He adverted to the argu-sen, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Marcy, Miller, Naura, ment that the distribution of the gross proceeds would be Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, sprag, a distribution in part of revenue from other sources, and Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, Webster, Wilkins.-7. stated that the bill authorized the division of the nett pro-| The question was then taken on the second branch of ceeds only. He detailed what would be the deductions the amendment, and also negatived, as follows: made by the accounting officers under the bill, when they determined the amount of the proceeds applicable to division. The nett amount of charges on the annual sales of the public lands did not, he believed, exceed four per cent. He hoped that the question of distribution would be settled, and in such manner as to redound to the hap-ton, Dallas, Dickerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Frelingly piness and prosperity of every State, and, of consequence, of the whole of the Union. YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Buckner, Ellis, For syth, Grundy, Hayne, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King, M gum, Moore, Poindexter, Robinson, Smith, Tazewel Tipton, Troup, White.-20. NAY.-Messrs. Bell, Brown, Chambers, Clay, Clay sen, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Marcy, Miller, Nanda Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, Sprag Tomlinson, Tyler, Waggaman, Webster, Wilkins.-28 Mr. POINDEXTER moved to amend the bill in the first section, by striking out ten, and inserting twelve and a half per cent. Messrs. CLAY and HOLMES expressed their intentan to vote for the amendment. Mr. HAYNE briefly replied on the subject of the discrimination between the revenue from the public lands and from other sources, and contended that if the construction of the gentleman from Kentucky was correct, there was no limitation to the powers of the General Government; and they might be exercised under a wild discretion, the extent of which could not be anticipated or Mr. TIPTON moved to insert fourteen per cent. controlled. He asserted that there ought not to be any The CHAIR pronounced this motion to be out of order. surplus money in the treasury, but that care should be Mr. HAYNE appealed from the decision of the Ca taken to regulate the taxes so as to have no unnecessary This appeal led to a discussion, in which the decision amount in the treasury. He denied that he was anxious the CHAIR was supported by Messrs. WEBSTER to increase the revenue from the public lands. He was CLAY, and opposed by Messrs. HAYNE, MILLER, and willing to place them on a fair and equitable ground. KING. =2, 1832.] Public Lands. [SENATE. he question was then taken, when there appeared— dexter, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, EAS.-Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, D.ck- Sprague, Tipton, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Webster, Wiln, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Holmes, Johnston, kins.--27. ght, Naudain, Poindexter, Prentiss, Robbins, Rug. , Seymour, S.lsbee, Smith, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Ester, Wilkins.-23. AYS.--Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Buckner, Dal- Ir. MOORE moved that the Senate now adjourn. The question was then taken on the motion to strike out "colonization," by yeas and nays, and decided as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Buckner, Dallas, Dudley, Ellis, Forsyth, Grundy, Hayne, Hill, Kane, King, Mangum, Marcy, Miller, Moore, Robinson, Tazewell, Tipton, Waggaman, White.--22. NAYS.-Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, DickNe-erson, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Hendricks, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Naudain, Poindexter, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, Smith, Sprague, Tomlinson, Tyler, Webster, Wilkins.-25. The question recurring on the motion of Mr. POINDEX4, it was decided by yeas and nays, as follows: EAS.-Messrs. Bell, Benton, Buckner, Clay, Clay- Mr. BENTON moved to amend the second section, by Dickerson, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Hendricks, striking out the words "among the twenty-four States of Imes, Johnston, Kane, King, Knight, Moore, Naudain, the Union, according to their federal population," and ndexter, Prentiss, Robbins, Robinson, Ruggles, Sils-insert, "into as many shares as there are Senators and =, Tipton, Tomlinson, Waggaman, Webster.-27. Representatives of the different States of the Union, and WAYS.-Messrs. B.bb, Brown, Chambers, Dallas, Dud-divided in that proportion." , Ellis, Forsyth, Grundy, Hayne, Hill, Marcy, Miller, The question being taken, the motion was negatived-ymour, Smith, Sprague, Tazewell, Troup, Tyler, yeas 13, nays 30. hite, Wilkins.-20. Mr. POINDEXTER then moved to amend the bill by ding a fifth section, granting to Mississippi, Louisiana, | Missouri, 600,000 acres each, for purposes specified; the yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. HENDRICK'S moved to amend the amendment, adding so many acres to the grant to Indiana, Alaba, and Illinois, as would make the aggregate given to se States equal to the grants now asked for the other ites. The amendment to the amendment was then agreed to; the question was taken on the amendment as amended, I decided as follows: YEAS.--Messrs. Bell, Benton, Buckner, Clay, Clayton, NAYS.--Messrs. Brown, Chambers, Dallas, Dudley, Mr. MOORE moved that the Senate adjourn, (seven o'clock.) Negatived-yeas 16, nays 28. Mr. ROBINSON moved to amend the bill by reducing the price of lands which had been ten years in the mar ket to one dollar per acre, and to actual settlers at fifty cents per acre. Negatived, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Ellis, Forsyth, Grundy, Hayne, Hendricks, Hill, Kane, King, Mangum, Marcy, Moore, Robinson, Smith, Tazewell, Tipton, White.--19. NAYS.--Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Dallas, Dickerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Miller, Naudain, Robbins, Ruggles, Seymour, Silsbee, Tomlinson, Tyler, Wagga. man, Webster, Wilkins.--24. Mr. HENDRICKS moved to amend by adding a proviso that the appropriations for the Cumberland road shall still be made out of the two per cent. fund; which was agreed to. Mr. BENTON moved to amend the bill by adding a section granting a township of land to the French college at St. Louis. Negatived--yeas 7, nays 35. Mr. HAYNE moved to strike out the words which spe- Mr. TIPTON moved to amend by adding a proviso that ied the purposes to which the proceeds were to be ap-nothing contained in this bill shall impair the power of ed by the States, so as to leave the States to direct the oceeds as they pleased. The proposition was advocated by Messrs. HAYNE, It was contended by the opponents of the amendment, On the other side, it was insisted that the States would ve a right to use the money as they pleased; and that, they are disposed to direct it to internal improvements, ucation, or colonization, they will do it as well in the sence of all limitations, as when they exist. Mr. WEBSTER asked for a division of the question, as to take the question first on striking out the words of education and internal improvements;" and being ken on this branch of the amendment, it was negatived, follows: YEAS.--Messrs. Benton, Bibb, Brown, Buckner, Ellis, rsyth, Grundy, Hayne, H., Kane, King, Mangum, arcy, Miller, Moore, Robinson, Smith, Tazewell, Tyler, Tite.--20. Congress to grant donations of lands hereafter, &c. Mr. CLAY seconded the motion; which was agreed to. Mr. BENTON moved to amend the bill in the second section, by inserting a variety of expenses connected with the public lands, to be deducted before a division of the proceeds shall be made. Negatived-yeas 18, nays 23. The bill was then reported as amended. Mr. TAZEWELL wished to have the bill and amendments printed, and moved to lay them on the table, and print them. Mr. CLAY said that the amendments were easily understood; and he hoped that the Senate would pass this bill to its third reading to-night, and then go home and get their dinner or supper, sleep upon it, and come here tomorrow prepared to go on with the tariff. Mr. TAZEWELL said there were incongruities in the bill which he wished to have corrected, and he hoped the Senate would allow time to correct them. The question was then taken on the motion of Mr. TAZEWELL, and decided in the negative-yeas 17, nays 25. The question was then taken on concurring in the amendments, and decided in the affirmative--yeas 26, nays 15. NAYS.--Messrs. Bell, Chambers, Clay, Clayton, Dal- On motion of Mr. CHAMBERS, the bill was amended D.ckerson, Dudley, Ewing, Foot, Frelinghuysen, by introducing after the word "colonization" the words endricks, Holmes, Johnston, Knight, Naudam, Poin-of free persons of color." |