learn with how little wisdom mankind is Robed in a little brief authority, Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven, this various earth-see its surface diversi- collected wisdom? Sir, can we forget the fied by hills and valleys, rocks, and fertile advice of a great statesman to his sonfields. Notice its different productions-"Go, see the world, my son, that you may its infinite varieties of soil and climate. See the mighty rivers winding their way to the very mountain's base, and thence guiding man to the vast ocean, dividing, yet connecting nations. Can any man who considers these things with the eye of a philosopher, not read the design of the great Creator (written legibly in his works) that his children should be drawn together in a free commercial intercourse, and mutual exchanges of the various gifts with which a bountiful Providence has blessed them. Commerce, sir, restricted even as she has been, has been the great source of civilization and refinement all over the world. Next to the Christian religion, I consider free trade in its largest sense as the greatest blessing that can be conferred upon any people. Hear, sir, what Patrick Henry, the great orator of Virginia, whose soul was the very temple of freedom, says on this subject: 46 Why should we fetter commerce? If a man is in chains, he droops and bows to the earth, because his spirits are broken, but let him twist the fetters from his legs, and he will stand erect. Fetter not commerce! Let her be as free as the air. She will range the whole creation, and return on the four winds of heaven to bless the land with plenty." But, it has been said, that free trade would do very well, if all nations would adopt it; but as it is, every nation must protect itself from the effect of restrictions by countervailing measures. I am persuaded, sir, that this is a great, a most fatal error. If retaliation is resorted to for the honest purpose of producing a redress of the grievance, and while adhered to no longer than there is a hope of success, it may, like war itself, be sometimes just and necessary. But if it have no such object, "it is the unprofitable combat of seeing which can do the other the most harm." The case can hardly be conceived in which permanent restrictions, as a measure of retaliation, could be profitable. In every possible situation, a trade, whether more or less restricted, is profitable, or it is not. This can only be decided by experience, and if the trade be left to regulate itself, water would not more naturally seek its level, than the intercourse adjust itself to the true interest of the parties. Sir, as to this idea of the regulation by government of the pursuits of men, I consider it as a remnant of barbarism disgraceful to an enlightened age, and inconsistent with the first principles of rational liberty. I hold government to be utterly incapable, from its position, of exercising such a power wisely, prudently, or justly. Are the rulers of the world the depositaries of its The gentleman has appealed to the example of other nations. Sir, they are all against him. They have had restrictions enough, to be sure; but they are getting heartily sick of them, and in England, particularly, would willingly get rid of them if they could. We have been assured, by the declaration of a minister of the crown, from his place in parliament, "that there is a growing conviction, among all men of sense and reflection in that country, that the true policy of all nations is to be found in unrestricted industry. Sir, in England they are now retracing their steps, and endeavoring to relieve themselves of the system as fast as they can. Within a few years past, upwards of three hundred statutes, imposing restrictions in that country, have been repealed; and a case has recently occurred there, which seems to leave no doubt that, if Great Britain has grown great, it is, as Mr. Huskisson has declared, "not in consequence of, but in spite of their restrictions." The silk manufacture, protected by enormous bounties, was found to be in such a declining condition, that the government was obliged to do something to save it from total ruin. And what did they do? They considerably reduced the duty on foreign silks, both on the raw material and the manufactured article. The consequence was the immediate revival of the silk manufacture, which has since been nearly doubled. Sir, the experience of France is equally decisive. Bonaparte's effort to introduce cotton and sugar has cost that country millions; and, but the other day, a foolish attempt to protect the iron mines spread devastation through half of France, and nearly ruined the wine trade, on which one fifth of her citizens depend for subsistence. As to Spain, unhappy Spain, "fenced round with restrictions," her experience, one would suppose, would convince us, if anything could, that the protecting system in politics, like bigotry in religion, was utterly at war with sound principles and a liberal and enlightened policy. Sir, I say, in the words of the philosophical statesman of England, “leave a generous nation free to seek their own road to perfection.” Thank God, the night is passing away, and we have lived to see the dawn of a glorious day. The cause of free trade must and will prosper, and finally triumph. The politi cal economist is abroad; light has come into the world; and, in this instance at least, men will not "prefer darkness rather than light." Sir, let it not be said, in after times, that the statesmen of America were behind the age in which they lived-that allowance to the more moderate sum. The they initiated this young and vigorous country into the enervating and corrupting practices of European nations-and that, at the moment when the whole world were looking to us for an example, we arrayed ourselves in the cast-off follies and exploded errors of the old world, and, by the introduction of a vile system of artificial stimulants and political gambling, impaired the healthful vigor of the body politic, and brought on a decrepitude and premature dissolution. allowed the new states twelve and a half instead of ten per cent.; but as that was objected to by the president, in his veto message, and has been opposed in other quarters, I thought it best to restrict the bill also contains large and liberal grants of land to several of the new states, to place them upon an equality with others to which the bounty of congress has been heretofore extended, and provides that, when other new states shall be admitted into the union, they shall receive their share of the common fund. * * * * * What Mr. President, I have ever regarded, with feelings of the profoundest regret, the decision which the president of the United States felt himself induced to make on the bill of 1833. If the bill had passed, about twenty millions of dollars would have been, Mr. Clay's Speech on his Public Lands Bill. during the last three years, in the hands of MR. PRESIDENT,-Although I find my- the several states, applicable by them to self borne down by the severest affliction the beneficent purposes of internal improvewith which Providence has ever been ment, education or colonization. pleased to visit me, I have thought that immense benefits might not have been difmy private griefs ought not longer to pre- fused throughout the land by the active vent me from attempting, ill as I feel quali-employment of that large sum? What new fied, to discharge my public duties. And I now rise, in pursuance of the notice which has been given, to ask leave to introduce a bill to appropriate, for a limited time, the proceeds of the sales of the public lands of the United States, and for granting land to certain states. channels of commerce and communication might not have been opened? What industry stimulated, what labor rewarded? How many youthful minds might have received the blessings of education and knowledge, and been rescued from ignorance, vice, and ruin? How many descendants of Africa might have been transported from a country where they never can enjoy political or social equality, to the native land of their fathers, where no impediment exists to their attainment of the highest degree of elevation, intellectual, social and political! where they might have been successful instruments, in the hands of God, to spread the religion of His Son, and to lay the foundation of civil liberty. I feel it incumbent on me to make a brief explanation of the highly important measure which I have now the honor to propose. The bill which I desire to introduce, provides for the distribution of the proceeds of the public lands in the years 1833, 1834, 1835, 1836 and 1837, among the twenty-four states of the union, and conforms substantially to that which passed in 1833. It is therefore of a temporary character; but if it shall be found to have sal- But, although we have lost three precious utary operation, it will be in the power of years, the secretary of the treasury tells us a future congress to give it an indefinite that the principal of this vast sum is continuance; and if otherwise, it will ex-yet safe; and much good may still be pire by its own terms. In the event of war achieved with it. The spirit of improveunfortunately breaking out with any for- ment pervades the land in every variety eign power, the bill is to cease, and the of form, active, vigorous and enterprising, fund which it distributes is to be applied wanting pecuniary aid as well as intelligent to the prosecution of the war. The bill direction. The states are strengthening the directs that ten per cent. of the net pro- union by various lines of communication ceeds of the public lands sold within the thrown across and through the mountains. limits of the seven new states, shall be first New York has completed one great chain. set apart for them, in addition to the five Pennsylvania another, bolder in conception per cent. reserved by their several com- and more arduous in the execution. Virpacts with the United States; and that the ginia has a similar work in progress, worthy residue of the proceeds, whether from sales of all her enterprise and energy. A fourth, made in the states or territories, shall be further south, where the parts of the union divided among the twenty-four states in are too loosely connected, has been proproportion to their respective federal popu-jected, and it can certainly be executed lation. In this respect the bill conforms with the supplies which this bill affords, to that which was introduced in 1832. For and perhaps not without them. one, I should have been willing to have This bill passed, and these and other si milar undertakings completed, we may in- Bid harbors open, public ways extend, Bid the broad arch the dangerous flood contain, public lands among the states must depend on the fact whether they belong to them in their united federal character, or individually and separately. If in the former, it is manifest that the government, as their common agent or trustee, can have no right to distribute among them, for their individual, separate use, a fund derived from property held in their united and federal character, without a special power for that purpose which is not pretended. A position so clear of itself and resting on the established principles of law, when applied to individuals holding property in like manner, needs no illustration. If, on the contrary, they belong to the states in their individual and separate character, then the government would not only have the right but would be bound to apply the revenue to the separate use of the states. So far is incontrovertible, which presents the question: In which of the two characters are the lands held by the state? "To give a satisfactory answer to this question, it will be necessary to distinguish between the lands that have been ceded by the states, and those that have been purchased by the government out of the common funds of the Union. "The principal cessions were made by Virginia and Georgia. The former of all the tract of country between the Ohio, the Mississippi, and the lakes, including the states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan, and the territory of Wisconsin; and the latter, of the tract included in Alabama and Mississippi. I shall begin with the cession of Virginia, as it is on that the advocates for the distribution mainly rely to establish the right. I confess I feel anxious for the fate of this measure, less on account of any agency I have had in proposing it, as I hope and believe, than from a firm, sincere and thorough conviction, that no one measure ever presented to the councils of the nation, was fraught with so much unmixed good, and could exert such powerful and enduring influence in the preservation of the union itself and upon some of its highest interests. If I can be instrumental, in any degree, in the adoption of it, I shall enjoy, in that retirement into which I hope shortly to enter, a heart-feeling satisfaction and a lasting consolation. I shall carry there no regrets, no complaints, no reproaches on my own account. When I look back upon my hum"I hold in my hand an extract of all ble origin, left an orphan too young to have that portion of the Virginia deed of cession been conscious of a father's smiles and ca- which has any bearing on the point at resses; with a widowed mother, surrounded issue, taken from the volume lying on the by a numerous offspring, in the midst of table before me, with the place marked, pecuniary embarrassments; without a re- and to which any one desirous of examingular education, without fortune, without ing the deed may refer. The cession is friends, without patrons, I have reason to to the United States in Congress assembe satisfied with my public career. I ought bled, for the benefit of said states.' Every to be thankful for the high places and ho- word implies the states in their united nors to which I have been called by the federal character. That is the meaning of favor and partiality of my countrymen, the phrase United States. It stands in conand I am thankful and grateful. And I tradistinction to the states taken separately shall take with me the pleasing conscious- and individually; and if there could be, ness that in whatever station I have been by possibility, any doubt on that point, it placed, I have earnestly and honestly la- would be removed by the expression in bored to justify their confidence by a faith- Congress assembled '-an assemblage which ful, fearless, and zealous discharge of my constituted the very knot that united them. public duties. Pardon these personal al-I regard the execution of such a deed to lusions. Speech of John C. Calhoun, Against the Public Lands Bill, January 23, 1841. "Whether the government can constitutionally distribute the revenue from the the United States, so assembled, so conclusive that the cession was to them in their united and aggregate character, in contradistinction to their individual and separate character, and, by necessary consequence, that the lands so ceded belonged to them in their former and not in their latter character, that I am at a loss for words to make it clearer. To deny it, would be to deny that there is any truth in language. "But strong as this is, it is not all. The deed proceeds and says, that all the lands so ceded shall be considered a common fund for the use and benefit of such of the United States as have become, or shall become, members of the confederation or federal alliance of said states, Virginia inclusive, and concludes by saying, and shall be faithfully and bona fide disposed of for that purpose, and for no other use or purpose whatever.' If it were possible to raise a doubt before, those full, clear, and explicit terms would dispel it. It is impossible for language to be clearer. To be considered a common fund' is an expression directly in contradistinction to separate or individual, and is, by necessary implication, as clear a negative of the latter as if it had been positively expressed. This common fund to be for the use and benefit of such of the United States as have become, or shall become, members of the confederation or federal alliance.' That is as clear as language can express it, for their common use in their united federal character, Virginia being included as the grantor, out of abundant caution." "The Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Clay), and, as I now understand, the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster), agree, that the revenue from taxes can be applied only to the objects specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Thus repudiating the general welfare principle, as applied to the money power, so far as the revenue may be derived from that source. To this extent they profess to be good State Rights Jeffersonian Republicans. Now, sir, I would be happy to be informed by either of the able senators, by what political alchemy the revenue from taxes, by being vested in land, or other property, can, when again turned into revenue by sales, be entirely freed from all the constitutional restrictions to which they were liable before the investment, according to their own confessions. A satisfactory explanation of so curious and apparently incomprehensible a process would be a treat. "When I look, Mr. President, to what induced the states, and especially Virginia, to make this magnificent cession to the Union, and the high and patriotic motives urged by the old Congress to induce them to do it, and turn to what is now proposed, I am struck with the contrast and the great mutation to which human affairs are subject. The great and patriotic men of former times regarded it as essential to the consummation of the Union and the preservation of the public faith that the lands should be ceded as a common fund; but now, men distinguished for their ability and influence are striving with all their might to undo their holy work. Yes, sir; distribution and cession are the very reverse, in character and effect; the tendency of one is to union, and the other to disunion. The wisest of modern statesmen, and who had the keenest and deepest glance into futurity (Edmund Burke), truly said that the revenue is the state; to which I add, that to distribute the revenue, in a confederated community, amongst its members, is to dissolve the communitythat is, with us, the Union-as time will prove, if ever this fatal measure should be adopted." Speech of Hon. Robt. Y. Hayne Senator from South Carolina, delivered in the Senate Chamber January 21,1830, on Mr. Foot's resolution relating to the sales of the public lands. Mr. Hayne said, when he took occasion, two days ago, to throw out some ideas with respect to the policy of the government, in relation to the public lands, nothing certainly could have been further from his thoughts, than that he should have been compelled again to throw himself upon the indulgence of the Senate. Little did I expect, said Mr. H., to be called upon to meet such an argument as was yesterday urged by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Webster.) Sir, I questioned no man's opinions; I impeached no man's motives; I charged no party, or state, or section of country with hostility to any other, but ventured, as I thought, in a becoming spirit to put forth my own sentiments in relation to a great national question of public policy. Such was my course. The gentleman from Missouri, (Mr. Benton,) it is true, had charged upon the Eastern States an early and continued hostility towards the west, and referred to a number of historical facts and documents in support of that charge. Now, sir, how have these different arguments been met? The honorable gentleman from Massachusetts, after deliberating a whole night upon his course, comes into this chamber to vindicate New England; and instead of making up his issue with the gentleman from Missouri, on the charges which he had preferred, chooses to consider me as the author of those charges, and losing sight entirely of that gentleman, selects me as his adversary, and pours out all the vials of his mighty wrath upon my devoted head. Nor is he willing to stop there. He goes on to assail the institutions and policy of the south, and calls in question the principles and conduct of the state which I have the honor to represent. When I find a gentleman of mature age and experience, of acknowledged talents and profound sagacity, pursuing a course like this, declining the contest offered from the west, and making war upon the unoffending south, I must | most extravagant praise, he breaks forth in believe, I am bound to believe, he has some admiration of the greatness of Nathan object in view which he has not ventured Dane-and great indeed he must be, if it to disclose. Mr. President, why is this? be true, as stated by the senator from MasHas the gentleman discovered in former sachusetts, that "he was greater than controversies with the gentleman from Solon and Lycurgus, Minos, Numa PomMissouri, that he is overmatched by that pilius, and all the legislators and philososenator? And does he hope for an easy vic-phers of the world," ancient and modern. tory over a more feeble adversary? Has the Sir, to such high authority it is certainly gentleman's distempered fancy been dis- my duty, in a becoming spirit of humility, turbed by gloomy forebodings of " new to submit. And yet, the gentleman will alliances to be formed," at which he hinted? pardon me, when I say, that it is a little Has the ghost of the murdered COALITION unfortunate for the fame of this great legiscome back, like the ghost of Banquo, to lator, that the gentleman from Missouri "sear the eyeballs of the gentleman," and should have proved that he was not the will it not down at his bidding? Are dark author of the ordinance of '87, on which visions of broken hopes, and honors lost the senator from Massachusetts has reared forever, still floating before his heated so glorious a monument to his name. Sir, imagination? Sir, if it be his object to I doubt not the senator will feel some comthrust me between the gentleman from passion for our ignorance, when I tell him, Missouri and himself, in order to rescue that so little are we acquainted with the the east from the contest it has provoked modern great men of New England, that with the west, he shall not be gratified. until he informed us yesterday that we posSir, I will not be dragged into the defence sessed a Solon and a Lycurgus in the person of my friend from Missouri. The south of Nathan Dane, he was only known to shall not be forced into a conflict not its the south as a member of a celebrated own. The gentleman from Missouri is assembly, called and known by the name able to fight his own battles. The gallant of the "Hartford Convention." In the west needs no aid from the south to repel proceedings of that assembly, which I hold any attack which may be made on them in my hand, (at p. 19,) will be found in a from any quarter. Let the gentleman from few lines, the history of Nathan Dane; Massachusetts controvert the facts and and a little farther on, there is conclusive arguments of the gentleman from Mis- evidence of that ardent devotion to the souri, if he can-and if he win the victory, interest of the new states, which, it seems, let him wear the honors; I shall not de- has given him a just claim to the title of prive him of his laurels. "Father of the West." By the 2d resolution of the "Hartford Convention," it is declared, "that it is expedient to attempt to make provision for restraining Congress in the exercise of an unlimited power to make new states, and admitting them into the Union." So much for Nathan Dane, of Beverly, Massachusetts. The gentleman from Massachusetts, in reply to my remarks on the injurious operations of our land system on the prosperity of the west, pronounced an extravagant eulogium on the paternal care which the government had extended towards the west, to which he attributed all that was great and excellent in the present condi- In commenting upon my views in relation of the new states. The language of tion to the public lands, the gentleman inthe gentleman on this topic fell upon my sists, that it being one of the conditions of ears like the almost forgotten tones of the the grants that these lands should be aptory leaders of the British Parliament, at plied to "the common benefit of all the the commencement of the American revo-states, they must always remain a fund for lution. They, too, discovered that the colonies had grown great under the fostering care of the mother country; and I must confess, while listening to the gentleman, I thought the appropriate reply to his argument was to be found in the remark of a celebrated orator, made on that occasion: "They have grown great in spite of your protection." revenue; "and adds, "they must be treated as so much treasure." Sir, the gentleman could hardly find language strong enough to convey his disapprobation of the policy which I had ventured to recommend to the favorable consideration of the country. And what, sir, was that policy, and what is the difference between that gentleman and myself on that subject? I threw out The gentleman, in commenting on the the idea that the public lands ought not to policy of the government in relation to the be reserved forever, as "a great fund new states, has introduced to our notice a for revenue;" that they ought not to be certain Nathan Dane, of Massachusetts," treated as a great treasure;" but that the to whom he attributes the celebrated ordinance of '87, by which he tells us, "slavery was forever excluded from the new states north of the Ohio." After eulogizing the wisdom of this provision in terms of the course of our policy should rather be directed toward the creation of new states, and building up great and flourishing communities. Now, sir, will it be believed, by those |