tion of the states in the other house is not | we have seen, adopted into the reformed equal. We know that great advantage, in constitution of Virginia, restraining legisthat respect, is enjoyed by the slaveholding lative power, in questions of private right, states; and we know, too, that the intended and from impairing the obligation of conequivalent for that advantage-that is to tracts, is first introduced and established, say, the imposition of direct taxes in the as far as I am informed, as matter of exsame ratio-has become merely nominal; press written constitutional law, in this orthe habit of the government being almost dinance of 1787. And I must add, also, in invariably to collect its revenues from other regard to the author of the ordinance, who sources, and in other modes. Nevertheless, has not had the happiness to attract the I do not complain; nor would I counte- gentleman's notice heretofore, nor to avoid nance any movement to alter this arrange-his sarcasm now, that he was chairman of ment of representation. It is the original that select committee of the old Congress, bargain, the compact-let it stand; let the whose report first expressed the strong advantage of it be fully enjoyed. The sense of that body, that the old confederaUnion itself is too full of benefit to be tion was not adequate to the exigencies of hazarded in propositions for changing its the country, and recommending to the original basis. I go for the constitution as states to send delegates to the convention it is, and for the Union as it is. But I am which formed the present constitution. resolved not to submit, in silence, to accu- An attempt has been made to transfer sations, either against myself individually, from the north to the south the honor of or against the north, wholly unfounded this exclusion of slavery from the Northand unjust-accusations which impute to western territory. The journal, without us a disposition to evade the constitutional argument or comment, refutes such atcompact, and to extend the power of the tempt. The session of Virginia was made government over the internal laws and do- March, 1784. On the 19th of April folmestic condition of the states. All such lowing, a committee, consisting of Messrs. accusations, wherever and whenever made, Jefferson, Chase and Howell, reported all insinuations of the existence of any such a plan for a temporary government of purposes, I know and feel to be groundless the territory, in which was this article: and injurious. And we must confide in "That after the year 1800, there should be southern gentlemen themselves; we must neither slavery nor involuntary servitude trust to those whose integrity of heart and in any of the said states, otherwise than in magnanimity of feeling will lead them to punishment of crimes, whereof the party a desire to maintain and disseminate truth, shall have been convicted." Mr. Speight, and who possess the means of its diffusion of North Carolina, moved to strike out with the southern public; we must leave this paragraph. The question was put acit to them to disabuse that public of its cording to the form then practiced: "Shall, prejudices. But, in the mean time, for my these words stand, as part of the plan? own part, I shall continue to act justly, &c. New Hampshire, Massachusetts, whether those towards whom justice is ex- Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New ercised receive it with candor or with con- Jersey and Pennsylvania-seven statestumely. voted in the affirmative; Maryland, Virgin

North Carolina was divided. As the consent of nine states was necessary, the words could not stand, and were struck out accordingly. Mr. Jefferson voted for the clause, but was overruled by his colleagues.

Having had occasion to recur to the or-ia and South Carolina, in the negative. dinance of 1787, in order to defend myself against the inferences which the honorable member has chosen to draw from my former observations on that subject, I am not willing now entirely to take leave of it without another remark. It need hardly In March of the next year (1785) Mr. be said, that that paper expresses just sen- King, of Massachusetts, seconded by Mr. timents on the great subject of civil and Ellery, of Rhode Island, proposed the religious liberty. Such sentiments were formerly rejected article, with this addicommon, and abound in all our state papers tion: "And that this regulation shall be an of that day. But this ordinance did that article of compact, and remain a fundawhich was not so common, and which is mental principle of the constitution between not, even now, universal; that is, it set the thirteen original states and each of the forth and declared, as a high and binding states described in the resolve," &c. On duty of government itself, to encourage this clause, which provided the adequate schools and advance the means of educa- and thorough security, the eight Northern tion; on the plain reason that religion, States, at that time, voted affirmatively, morality and knowledge are necessary to and the four Southern States negatively. good government, and to the happiness of The votes of nine states were not yet obmankind. One observation further. The tained, and thus the provision was again important provision incorporated into the rejected by the Southern States. The perconstitution of the United States, and sev-severance of the north held out, and two eral of those of the states, and recently, as years afterwards the object was attained.

It is no derogation from the credit, what- bold though uneasy and laboring air of ever that may be, of drawing the ordi- confidence, as if he had detected in me an nance, that its principles had before been inconsistency. Judging from the gentleprepared and discussed, in the form of resolutions. If one should reason in that way, what would become of the distinguished honor of the author of the declaration of Independence? There is not a sentiment in that paper which had not been voted and resolved in the assemblies, and other popular bodies in the country, over and over again.

"to sever and divide

A hair 'twixt north and north-west side,"

man's manner, a stranger to the course of the debate, and to the point in discussion, would have imagined, from so triumphant a tone, that the honorable member was about to overwhelm me with a manifest contradiction. Any one who heard him, and who had not heard what I had, in fact, previously said, must have thought me routed and discomfited, as the gentleBut the honorable member has now man had promised. Sir, a breath blows found out that this gentleman, Mr. Dane, all this triumph away. There is not the was a member of the Hartford Convention. slightest difference in the sentiments of However uninformed the honorable mem- my remarks on the two occasions. What ber may be of characters and occurrences I said here on Wednesday is in exact acat the north, it would seem that he has at cordance with the opinions expressed by his elbows, on this occasion, some high- me in the other house in 1825. Though minded and lofty spirit, some magnani- the gentleman had the metaphysics of mous and true-hearted monitor, possessing Hudibras-though he were able the means of local knowledge, and ready to supply the honorable member with every thing, down even to forgotten and moth-eaten twopenny pamphlets, which he could not yet insert his metaphysical may be used to the disadvantage of his own country. But, as to the Hartford Convention, sir, allow me to say that the proceedings of that body seem now to be less read and studied in New England than farther south. They appear to be looked to, not in New England, but elsewhere, for the purpose of seeing how far they may serve as a precedent. But they will not answer the purpose-they are quite too tame. The latitude in which they originated was too cold. Other conventions, of more recent existence, have gone a whole bar's length beyond it. The learned doctors of Colleton and Abbeville have pushed their commentaries on the Hartford collect so far that the original text writers are thrown entirely into the shade. I have nothing to do, sir, with the Hartford Convention. Its journal, which the gentleman has quoted, I never read. So far as the honorable member may discover in its proceedings a spirit in any degree resembling that which was avowed and justified in those other conventions to which I have alluded, or so far as those proceedings can be shown to be disloyal to the constitution, or tending to disunion, so far I shall be as ready as any one to bestow on them reprehension and cen

sure.

scissors between the fair reading of my remarks in 1825 and what I said here last week. There is not only no contradiction, no difference, but, in truth, too exact a similarity, both in thought and language, to be entirely in just taste. I had myself quoted the same speech; had recurred to it, and spoke with it open before me; and much of what I said was little more than a repetition from it. In order to make finishing work with this alleged contradiction, permit me to recur to the origin of this debate, and review its course. This seems expedient, and may be done as well now as at any time.

Well, then, its history is this: the honorable member from Connecticut moved a resolution, which constituted the first branch of that which is now before us; that is to say, a resolution instructing the committee on public lands to inquire into the expediency of limiting, for a certain period, the sales of public lands to such as have heretofore been offered for sale; and whether sundry offices, connected with the sales of the lands, might not be abolished without detriment to the public service.

In the progress of the discussion which arose on this resolution, an honorable member from New Hampshire moved to amend the resolution, so as entirely to reverse its Having dwelt long on this convention, object; that is to strike it all out, and inand other occurrences of that day, in the sert a direction to the committee to inquire hope, probably, (which will not be grati- into the expediency of adopting measures fied,) that I should leave the course of this to hasten the sales, and extend more radebate to follow him at length in those ex-pidly the surveys of the lands. cursions, the honorable member returned, The honorable member from Maine (Mr. and attempted another object. He referred to a speech of mine in the other house, the same which I had occasion to allude to myself the other day; and has quoted a passage or two from it, with a

Sprague) suggested that both these propositions might well enough go, for consideration, to the committee; and in this state of the question, the member from South Carolina addressed the Senate in his first

speech. He rose, he said, to give his own free thoughts on the public lands. I saw him rise, with pleasure, and listened with expectation, though before he concluded I was filled with surprise. Certainly, I was never more surprised than to find him following up, to the extent he did, the sentiments and opinions which the gentleman from Missouri had put forth, and which it is known he has long entertained.

by the arms of England, would not grudge their mite to relieve the mother country from the heavy burden under which she groaned. The language of Colonel Barre, in reply to this, was, 'They planted by your care? Your oppression planted them in America. They ffed from your tyranny, and grew by your neglect of them. So soon as you began to care for them, you showed your care by sending persons to spy out their liberties, misrepresent their character, prey upon them, and eat out their substance."

I need not repeat, at large, the general topics of the honorable gentleman's speech. When he said, yesterday, that he did not attack the Eastern States, he certainly And does this honorable gentleman mean must have forgotten not only particular to maintain that language like this is apremarks, but the whole drift and tenor of plicable to the conduct of the governhis speech; unless he means by not at- ment of the United States towards the tacking, that he did not commence hostili-western emigrants, or to any representaties, but that another had preceded him in the attack. He, in the first place, disapproved of the whole course of the government for forty years, in regard to its dispositions of the public land; and then, turning northward and eastward, and fancying he had found a cause for alleged narrowness and niggardliness in the "accursed policy" of the tariff, to which he represented the people of New England as wedded, he went on, for a full hour, with remarks, the whole scope of which was to exhibit the results of this policy, in feelings and in measures unfavorable to the west. I thought his opinions unfounded and erroneous, as to the general course of the government, and ventured to reply to them.

tion given by me of that conduct? Were the settlers in the west driven thither by our oppression? Have they flourished only by our neglect of them? Has the government done nothing but prey upon them, and eat out their substance? Sir, this fervid eloquence of the British speaker, just when and where it was uttered, and fit to remain an exercise for the schools, is not a little out of place, when it was brought thence to be applied here, to the conduct of our own country towards her own citizens. From America to England it may be true; from Americans to their own government it would be strange language. Let us leave it to be recited and declaimed by our boys against a foreign nation; not introduce it here, to recite and declaim ourselves against our own.

The gentleman had remarked on the analogy of other cases, and quoted the conduct of European governments towards But I come to the point of the alleged their own subjects, settling on this conti- contradiction. In my remarks on Wednesnent, as in point, to show that we had been day, I contended that we could not give harsh and rigid in selling when we should away gratuitously all the public lands; that have given the public lands to settlers. I we held them in trust; that the governthought the honorable member had suf- ment had solemnly pledged itself to disfered his judgment to be betrayed by a pose of them as a common fund for the false analogy; that he was struck with an common benefit, and to sell and settle them appearance of resemblance where there as its discretion should dictate. Now, sir, was no real similitude. I think so still. what contradiction does the gentleman find The first settlers of North America were to this sentiment in the speech of 1825? enterprising spirits, engaging in private He quotes me as having then said, that we adventure, or fleeing from tyranny at home. ought not to hug these lands as a very When arrived here, they were forgotten by great treasure. Very well, sir; supposing the mother country, or remembered only me to be accurately reported in that exto be oppressed. Carried away again by pression, what is the contradiction? I have the appearance of analogy, or struck with not now said, that we should hug these the eloquence of the passage, the honor- lands as a favorite source of pecuniary inable member yesterday observed that the come. No such thing. It is not my view. conduct of government towards the western What I have said, and what I do say, is, emigrants, or my representation of it, that they are a common fund-to be disbrought to his mind à celebrated speech posed of for the common benefit-to be sold in the British Parliament. It was, sir, at low prices, for the accommodation of the speech of Colonel Barre. On the ques- settlers, keeping the object of settling the tion of the stamp act, or tea tax, I forget lands as much in view as that of raising which, Colonel Barre had heard a member money from them. This I say now, and on the treasury bench argue, that the peo- this I have always said. Is this hugging ple of the United States, being British them as a favorite treasure? Is there no colonists, planted by the maternal care, difference between hugging and hoardnourished by the indulgence, and protected | ing this fund, on the one hand, as a great

But, after all, this is not the point of the debate; and I must bring the gentleman back to that which is the point.

treasure, and on the other of disposing of | the honorable gentleman, on what ground it at low prices, placing the proceeds in the it is that I consent to give them away in general treasury of the Union? My opin- particular instances. How, he inquires, ion is, that as much is to be made of the do I reconcile with these professed sentiland, as fair and reasonably may be, selling ments my support of measures appropriit all the while at such rates as to give the ating portions of the lands to particular fullest effect to settlement. This is not roads, particular canals, particular rivers, giving it all away to the states, as the gen- and particular institutions of education in tleman would propose, nor is it hugging the west? This leads, sir, to the real and the fund closely and tenaciously, as a fa-wide difference in political opinions bevorite treasure; but it is, in my judgment, tween the honorable gentleman and mya just and wise policy, perfectly according self. On my part, I look upon all these with all the various duties which rest on objects as connected with the common government. So much for my contradic- good, fairly embraced in its objects and its tion. And what is it? Where is the terms; he, on the contrary, deems them all, ground of the gentleman's triumph? What if good at all, only local good. This is inconsistency, in word or doctrine, has he our difference. The interrogatory which been able to detect? Sir, if this be a sam- he proceeded to put, at once explains this ple of that discomfiture with which the difference. "What interest," asks he, "has honorable gentleman threatened me, com- South Carolina in a canal in Ohio?" Sir, mend me to the word discomfiture for the this very question is full of significance. rest of my life. It develops the gentleman's whole political system; and its answer expounds mine. Here we differ toto cœlo. I look upon a road over the Alleghany, a canal round the The real question between me and him falls of the Ohio, or a canal or railway is, Where has the doctrine been advanced, from the Atlantic to the western waters, as at the south or the east, that the popula- being objects large and extensive enough tion of the west should be retarded, or, at to be fairly said to be for the common least, need not be hastened, on account of benefit. The gentleman thinks otherwise, its effect to drain off the people from the and this is the key to open his construction Atlantic States? Is this doctrine, as has of the powers of the government. He been alleged, of eastern origin? That is may well ask, upon his system, What inthe question. Has the gentleman found any-terest has South Carolina in a canal in thing by which he can make good his accusation? I submit to the Senate, that he has entirely failed; and as far as this debate has shown, the only person who has advanced such sentiments is a gentleman from South Carolina, and a friend to the honorable member himself. This honorable gentleman has given no answer to this; there is none which can be given. This simple fact, while it requires no comment to enforce it, defies all argument to refute it. I could refer to the speeches of another southern gentleman, in years before, of the same general character, and to the same effect, as that which has been quoted; but I will not consume the time of the Senate by the reading of them.

Ohio? On that system, it is true, she has no interest. On that system, Ohio and Carolina are different governments and different countries, connected here, it is true, by some slight and ill-defined bond of union, but in all main respects separate and diverse. On that system, Carolina has no more interest in a canal in Ohio than in Mexico. The gentleman, therefore, only follows out his own principles; he does no more than arrive at the natural conclusions of his own doctrines; he only announces the true results of that creed which he has adopted himself, and would persuade others to adopt, when he thus declares that South Carolina has no interest in a public work in Ohio. Sir, we nar row-minded people of New England do not reason thus. Our notion of things is entirely different. We look upon the states not as separated, but as united. We love to dwell on that Union, and on the mutual happiness which it has so much promoted, and the common renown which it has so greatly contributed to acquire. In our contemplation, Carolina and Ohio are parts of the same country-states united under the We approach, at length, sir, to a more same general government, having interests important part of the honorable gentle- common, associated, intermingled. In man's observations. Since it does not ac- whatever is within the proper sphere of the cord with my views of justice and policy, constitutional power of this government, to vote away the public lands altogether, we look upon the states as one. We do as mere matter of gratuity, I am asked, by I not impose geographical limits to our patri

So then, sir, New England is guiltless of the policy of retarding western population, and of all envy and jealousy of the growth of the new states. Whatever there be of that policy in the country, no part of it is hers. If it has a local habitation, the honorable member has probably seen, by this time, where he is to look for it; and if it now has received a name, he himself has christened it.