CHAPTER XX.

MR. CLAY'S LAND POLICY.-His Report in 1832.-Reasons of its Reference to the Committee on Manufactures.-Statistical Tables.-Extracts from Mr. Clay's Speeches.-General Jackson's Pocketing the Land Bill.-The Argument.

IT is deemed economical in all respects of space and argument, in executing the task, and in accomplishing the object, of these pages, so far as they respect the subject here propounded, to throw into a note below, some extracts from Mr. Clay's report on the public lands, presented to the senate, April 16, 1832.* They

EXTRACTS FROM MR. CLAY'S REPORT ON THE PUBLIC LANDS-IN SENATE, APRIL 16, 1832.

"The public lands belonging to the general government, are situated, first, within the limits of the United States, as defined by the treaty of peace which terminated the revolutionary war; and secondly, within the boundaries of Louisiana and Florida, as ceded by France and Spain, respectively, to the United States. 1. At the commencement of the revolutionary war, there were, in some of the states, large bodies of waste and unappropriated lands, principally west of the Allegany mountains, and in the southern or southwestern quarters of the Union; while, in others, of more circumscribed, or better defined limits, no such resource existed. During the progress of that war, the question was agitated, what should be done with these lands, in the event of its successful termination? That question was likely to lead to paralyzing divisions and jealousies. The states not containing any considerable quantity of waste lands, contended that, as the war was waged with united means, with equal sacrifices, and at the common expense, the waste lands ought to be considered as a common property, and not be exclusively appropriated to the benefit of the particular states within which they happened to be situated. These, however, resisted the claim, upon the ground that each state was entitled to the whole of the territory, whether waste or cultivated, included within its chartered limits. To check the progress of discontent, and arrest the serious consequences to which the agitation of this question might lead, Congress recommended to the states to make liberal cessions of the waste and unceded lands to the United States, and on the 10th day of October, 1780, Resolved, that the unappropriated lands that may be ceded or relinquished to the United States, by any particular state, pursuant to the recommendation of Congress of the 6th of September last, shall be disposed of for the common benefit of the United States,' &c.

"In conformity with the recommendation of Congress, the several states containing waste and uncultivated lands, made cessions of them to the United States. The declared object having been substantially the same in all of these cessions, it is only necessary to advert to the terms of some of them. The first, in order of time, was that of New York, made on the first day of March, 1781, by its delegation in Congress, in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the state; and the terms of the deed of cession expressly provide, that the ceded lands and territories were to be held to and for the only use and benefit of such of the states as are, or shall become, parties to the articles of confederation.' That of Virginia was the next in date, but by far the most important of all the cessions made by

who wish to understand Mr. Clay's public land policy, will read this document attentively, making due allowances for the growth of the country since that time, and the greater changes in some the different states, both as respects the extent and value of the country ceded. It comprehended the right of that commonwealth to the vast territory northwest of the river Ohio, embracing but not confined to the limits of the present states of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. The deed of cession was executed by the delegation of Virginia in Congress, in 1784, agreeably to an act of the legislature, passed in 1783; and among other conditions, the deed explicitly declares, that all the lands within the territory so ceded to the United States, and not reserved for or appropriated to any of the beforementioned purposes, or disposed of in bounties to the officers and soldiers of the American army, shall be considered a common fund for the use and benefit of such of the United States as have become, or shali become, members of the confederation or federal alliance of the said states, Virginia inclusive, according to their usual respective proportions, in the general charge and expenditure, and shall be faithfully and bona fide disposed of for that purpose, and for no other purpose or use whatever.' Passing by the cessions with other states, prompted by a magnanimous spirit of union and patriotism, successively made, we come to the last in the series, that of the state of Georgia, in 1802. The articles of agreement and cession entered into between that state and the United States, among various other conditions, contain the unequivocal declaration, that all the lands ceded by this agreement to the United States, shall, after satisfying the abovementioned payment of one million two hundred and fifty thousand dollars to the state of Georgia, and the grants recognised by the preceding conditions, be considered as a common fund for the use and benefit of the United States, Georgia included, and shall be faithfully disposed of for that purpose, and for no other use or purpose whatever.'

"Thus, by the clear and positive terms of these acts of cession, was a great public and national trust created and assumed by the general government. It became solemnly bound to hold and administer the lands ceded, as a common fund for the use and benefit of all the states, and for no other use or purpose whatever. To waste or misapply this fund, or to divert it from the common benefit for which it was conveyed, would be a violation of the trust. The general government has no more power, rightfully, to cede the lands thus acquired to one of the new states, without a fair equivalent, than it could retrocede them to the state or states from which they were originally obtained. There would indeed be much more equity in the latter than in the former case. Nor is the moral responsibility of the general government at all weakened by the consideration that, if it were so unmindful of its duty as to disregard the sacred character of the trust, there might be no competent power, peacefully applied, which could coerce its faithful execution.

"2d. The other source whence the public lands of the United States have been acquired, are, first, the treaty of Louisiana concluded in 1802; and secondly, the treaty of Florida, signed in 1819. By the first, all the country west of the Mississippi, and extending to the Pacific ocean, known as Louisiana, which had successively belonged to France, Spain, and France again, including the island of New Orleans, and stretching east of the Mississippi to the Perdido, was transferred to the United States, in consideration of the sum of fifteen millions of dollars, which they stipulated to pay, and have since punctually paid, to France, besides other conditions deemed favorable and important to her interests. By the treaty of Florida, both the provinces of East and West Florida, whether any portion of them was or was not comprehended within the limits of Louisiana, were ceded to the United States in consideration, besides other things, of the payment of five millions of dollars, which they agreed to pay, and have since accordingly paid. "The large pecuniary considerations thus paid to these two foreign powers, were drawn from the treasury of the people of the United States, and, consequently, the countries for which they formed the equivalents, ought to be held and deemed for the common benefit of the people of the United States. To divert the lands from that general object; to misapply or sacrifice them; to squander or improvidently cast them away, would be alike subversive of the interests of the people of the United States, and contrary to the plain dictates of the duty by which the general government stands bound to the states and to the whole people.

states than in others, as they affect the several classes of statistical information. There are the principles, and the full development of the scheme.

"It appears (from a report of the secretary of the treasury to the house of rep resentatives, of the 6th of April, 1832) that the aggregate of all sums of money which have been expended by the United States, in the acquisition of the public lands, including interest on account of the purchases of Louisiana and Florida, down to the 30th of September, 1831, and including also expenses in their sale and management, is $48,077,551 40; and that the amount of money received at the treasury for proceeds of the sales of the public lands, down to the 30th of September, 1831, is $37,272,713 31. The government, therefore, has not been reimbursed by $10,804,838 09. According to the same report, it appears, that the estimated amount of unsold lands, on which the foreign and Indian titles have been extinguished, is 227,293,884 acres, within the limits of the new states and territories; and that the Indian title remains on 113,577,869 acres within the same limits; that there have been granted to Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Alabama, for internal improvements, 2,187,665 acres; for colleges, academies, and universities, in the new states and territories, the quantity of 508,009 acres; for education, being the thirty-sixth part of the public lands appropriated for common schools, the amount of 7,952,538 acres; and for seats of government in some of the new states and territories, 21,589 acres. By a report of the commissioner of the general land office, communicated to Congress with the annual message of the president of the United States, in December, 1827, the total quantity of the public lands beyond the boundaries of the new states and territories, was estimated to be 750,000,000 of acres. The aggregate, therefore, of all the unsold and unappropriated public lands of the United States, surveyed and unsurveyed, on which the Indian title remains or has been extinguished, lying within or without the boundaries of the new states and territories, agreeably to the two reports now referred to, is 1,090,871,753 acres. There had been 138,988,224 acres surveyed, and the quantity of only 19,239,412 acres sold down to the 1st of January, 1826. When the information called for shall be received, the subsequent surveys and sales, down to the present period, will be ascertained.

"The committee are instructed by the senate, to inquire into the expediency of reducing the price of the public lands, and also of ceding them to the several states in which they are situated, on reasonable terms. The committee will proceed to examine these two subjects of inquiry distinctly, beginning with that which relates to a reduction of price.

"1. According to the existing mode of selling the public lands, they are first offered at public auction for what they will bring, in a free and fair competition among the purchasers. When the public sales cease, the lands remaining unsold may be bought, from time to time, at the established rate of one dollar and a quarter per acre. The price was reduced to that sum in 1820, from two dollars per acre, at which it had previously stood from the first establishment of the present system of selling the public lands. A leading consideration with Congress in the reduction of the price, was that of substituting cash sales for the credits which had been before allowed, and which, on many accounts, it was deemed expedient to abolish. A further reduction of price, if called for by the public interests, must be required, either, first, because the government now demands more than a fair price for the public lands; or, secondly, because the existing price retards injuriously the settlement and population of the new states and territories. These suggestions deserve separate and serious consideration.

"First, the committee possess no means of determining the exact value of all the public lands now in market; nor is it material, at the present time, that the precise worth of each township or section should be accurately known. It is presumable that a considerable portion of the immense quantity offered for sale, or held by the United States, would not now command, and may not be intrinsically worth, the minimum price fixed by the law; on the other hand, it is certain that a large part is worth more. If there could be a discrimination made, and the government had any motives to hasten the sales beyond the regular demands of the population, it might be proper to establish different rates, according to the classes of land; but the government having no inducement to such acceleration, has hitherto proceeded on the liberal policy of establishing a moderate price, and

The importance of this subject is briefly represented by Mr. Clay, in his speech when the bill brought in with this report was under debate, as follows:

"No subject which had presented itself to the present, or perhaps any preceding Congress, was of greater magnitude than that by subdivision of the sections, so as to accommodate the poorer citizens, has placed the acquisition of a home within the reach of every industrious man. For one hundred dollars any one may now purchase eighty, and for fifty dollars, forty acres of first-rate land, yielding, with proper cultivation, from fifty to eighty bushels of Indian corn per acre, or other equivalent crops.

"There is no more satisfactory criterion of the fairness of the price of an article, than that arising from the briskness of the sales when it is offered in the market. On applying this rule, the conclusion would seem to be irresistible, that the established price is not too high. The amount of the sales in the year 1828, was $1,018,308 75; in 1829, $1,517,175 13; in 1830, $2,329,356 14; and during the year 1831, $3,000,000. And the secretary of the treasury observes, in his annual report, at the commencement of this session, that the receipts from the public lands, during the present year, it will be perceived, have likewise exceeded the estimates, and indeed have gone beyond all former example. It is believed that, notwithstanding the large amount of scrip and forfeited land stock that may still be absorbed in payment for lands, yet, if the surveys now projected be completed, the receipts from this source of revenue, will not fall greatly below those of the present year.' And he estimates the receipts, during the current year, from this source, at three millions of dollars. It is incredible to suppose that the amount of sales would have risen to so large a sum, if the price had been unreasonably high. The committee are aware that the annual receipts may be expected to fluctuate, as fresh lands, in favorite districts, are brought into market, and according to the activity or sluggishness of emigration in different years.

"Against any considerable reduction in the price of the public lands, unless it be necessary to a more rapid population of the new states, which will be hereafter examined, there are weighty, if not decisive considerations.

"First, the government is the proprietor of much the largest quantity of the unseated lands of the United States. What it has in market, bears a large proportion to the whole of the unoccupied lands within their limits. If a considerable quantity of any article, land, or any commodity whatever, is in market, the price at which it is sold, will affect, in some degree, the value of the whole of that article, whether exposed to sale or not. The influence of the reduction of the price of the public lands, would probably be felt throughout the Union; certainly in all the western states, and most in those which contain, or are nearest to, the public lands. There ought to be the most cogent and conclusive reasons for adopting a measure which might seriously impair the value of the property of the yeomanry of the country. While they are decidedly the most important class in the community, most patient, patriotic, and acquiescent in whatever public policy is pursued, they are unable or unwilling to resort to those means of union and concert which other interests employ to make themselves heard and respected. Government should, therefore, feel itself constantly bound to guard, with sedulous care, the rights and welfare of the great body of our yeomanry. Would it be just toward those who have heretofore purchased public lands, at high pricesto say nothing as to the residue of the agricultural interests of the United Statesto make such a reduction, and thereby impair the value of their property? Ought not any such plan of reduction, if adopted, to be accompanied with compensation for the injury which they would inevitably sustain ?

"Secondly, a material reduction of price would excite the spirit of speculation, now dormant, and probably lead to a transfer of large quantities of the public domain, from the control of government to the hands of the speculator. At the existing price, and with such extensive districts as the public constantly offers in the market, there is no great temptation to speculation. The demand is regular, keeping pace with the progress of emigration, and is supplied on known and moderate terms. If the price were much reduced, the strongest incentives to the engrossment of better lands would be presented to large capitalists, and the emigrant, instead of being able to purchase from his own government, upon uniform

of the public lands. There was another, indeed, which possessed a more exciting and absorbing interest; but the excitement was happily but temporary in its nature. Long after we shall cease to be agitated by the tariff, ages after our manufactures shall have acquired a stability and perfection which will enable them successand established conditions, might be compelled to give much higher and more fluctuating prices to the speculator. An illustration of this effect is afforded by the military bounty lands granted during the late war. Thrown into the market at prices below the government rate, they notoriously became an object of speculation, and have principally fallen into the hands of speculators, retarding the settlement of the districts which include them.

"Thirdly, the greatest emigration that is believed now to take place, from any of the states, is from Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. The effects of a material reduction in the price of the public lands, would be, first, to lessen the value of real estate in those three states; secondly, to diminish their interest in the public domain, as a common fund for the benefit of all the states; and thirdly, to offer what would operate as a bounty to further emigration from those states, occasioning more and more lands situated within them to be thrown into the market, thereby not only lessening the value of their lands, but draining them of both their population and currency.

"And, lastly, Congress has, within a few years, made large and liberal grants of the public lands to several states. To Ohio, 922,937 acres; to Indiana, 384,728 acres; to Illinois, 480,000 acres; and to Alabama, 400,000 acres ;-amounting together to 2,187,665 acres. Considerable portions of these lands yet remain unsold. The reduction of the price of the public lands, generally, would impair the value of these grants, as well as injuriously affect that of the lands which have been sold in virtue of them."

The report proceeds to answer the objections, first, that the price retards the sale; and next, that the price is a tax; both of which are well refuted. It was shown, that in the increase of population in the United States, from 1820 to 1830, as declared by the census, being from 9,579,873 to 12,716,697, the average increase of the seven new states, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, was eighty-five per cent., while the average increase of the seventeen states, containing no part of the public lands, was only twenty-fire per cent., and that of the thirteen original states only seventeen per cent. To the objection, that the public lands were not taxable for the expenses of the states in which they lie, it was answered, first, that, in lieu thereof, those states received five per cent. of the proceeds of the sales; next, that one section in every township, or one thirty-sixth part of the whole, was reserved to those states for purposes of education; and that other liberal grants of land for special and local purposes, were made to those states. In addition to all this, the committee recommended, that ten per cent. more of the then future proceeds of the sales be granted to the states within which they should be made, for purposes of internal improvement. The report then proceeds :

"2. The committee have now to proceed to the other branch of the inquiry, which they were required to make, that of the expediency of ceding the public lands to the several states in which they are situated, on reasonable terms. The inquiry comprehends, in its consequences, a cession of the whole public domain of the United States, whether lying within or beyond the limits of the present states and territories. For, although, in the terms of the inquiry, it is limited to the new states, cessions to them would certainly be followed by similar cessions to other new states, as they may, from time to time, be admitted into the Union. Three of the present territories [Michigan, Iowa, and Florida] have nearly attained to the requisite population entitling them to be received as members of the confederacy, and they shortly will be admitted. Congress could not consistently avoid ceding to them the public lands within their limits, after having made such cessions to the other states. The compact with the state of Ohio formed