originates in the fact of the government being the owner and administrator of so large a portion of the domain of nine states of the Union (being more than one third of the whole); and must increase, so long as it remains, with the increased number and relative weight of the new states. They will soon be increased to twelve, by the admission of the three territories, with a corresponding increase of weight in the government. The territories, on the contrary, are without political weight; and, of course, with the object in view, it would have been preposterous to have included them.

As little force is there in the objection, that some of the states would not accept of the cession. It is possible that Ohio and Indiana might not, but not probable, as the amount of public land within their borders is inconsiderable. But what of that? Should it prove to be the case, what possible injury could result? The fact of not accepting would be proof conclusive that the evil to be removed acted with but little relative force in either, and that the old system might be left to go on quietly in both, until the land within their limits was all disposed of. But the case is very different in the other seven. In them it is in active operation; and they would gladly accept of the cession, as the only remedy that can reach the disease, consistently with the interests of all concerned.

I come now to the final objection-that the land system is working well, and that we ought to adhere to the old maxim, "Let well enough alone." I say the final, as it is the last I recollect. If (as is possible-I took no notes) I have omitted to notice any objection made by the opponents of the measure, I call on them to name it now, that I may answer it before I proceed to notice the one just stated.

When I first addressed the Senate on this subject, at the opening of the discussion, I admitted that the system worked well at first; but I must limit the admission to its earliest stages. From the beginning it contained within itself the seeds of mighty disorders, and of great evils to the country, if nothing should be done to avert them. If I do not greatly mistake the tendency of the system as it stands, it is to extinguish the Indian titles far more rapidly than the demands of our increasing population require, and to disperse our population over a larger space than is desirable for the good of the country. That the former of these evils exists in reality, the proof is conclusive; and that it is already the cause of much difficulty and danger, and that both are rapidly on the increase, so as to threaten the loss of the lands themselves, I have, I trust, conclusively shown in my former remarks. It is sufficient here to repeat, in order to show that the Indian title has been too rapidly extinguished, that the government has sold, from the beginning of the system (now almost half a century), but little more than eighty millions of acres; and that not less than twenty millions, probably, are held by large holders, who purchased on speculation to sell again; making the actual demand for land for settlement not exceeding, probably, sixty millions in that long period of time. But during the same period the Indian litle has been extinguished to about three hundred and twenty millions of acres, of which about two hundred and twenty-six millions remain unsold-exceeding fourfold the demand for lands in consequence of the increase of our population. Such is the fact. To what cause is it to be attributed? I feel confident it will be principally found in the land system itself, which has been so indiscriminately praised during the discussion.

But, before I proceed to assign my reasons, it will be proper to pause and reflect on the influence that the occupation of the aborigines whom we are so rapidly expelling has had, through the mysterious dispensation of Providence, on the prosperity and greatness of our country. They were precisely in the condition most favourable to that mode of settlement which was best calculated to secure liberty, civilization, and prosperity. Had they been more numerous or powerful, the settlement of our country would either not have been made at all,

or would have been by the immediate agency and superintendence of the government, with a force not only sufficient to expel or subjugate the aborigines (as in Mexico by the Spaniards, and Hindostan by the English), but also sufficient to keep the colonies in subjection. How great a change such a mode of settlement would have made in the destiny of our country is not necessary to be explained on this occasion. But as it was, they were not too strong to prevent settlement by hardy and enterprising emigrants, inspired, in some instances, with a holy zeal to preserve their religious faith in its purity; in others, by the love of adventure and gain; and in all, with a devotion to liberty. It is to settlements formed by individuals so influenced, and thrown, from the beginning, on their own resources almost exclusively, that we owe our enterprise, energy, love of liberty, and capacity for self-government.

But there is another consideration not less important connected with the occupancy and condition of the aborigines. Had they not existed at all, or been too weak to prevent our people from spreading out over the vast extent of the continent without resistance, or resistance too feeble to keep them within moderate limits, in the rapid and wide outspread after game, pasturage, or choice spots on which to settle down, the far larger portion would have lost all the arts of civilized life, and become fierce herdsmen and barbarians, like our ancestors; and like them, in their frequent inundations over Southern Asia and Europe, would have overflowed and desolated the civilized agricultural and commercial settlements along the coast, excepting such as might be protected by walls and fortifications.

It is to this fortunate combination of facts connected with the aboriginal population-that they were not strong enough to prevent settlements in the manner they were actually formed, while they were sufficiently strong to prevent the too rapid spread of our population over the continent-that we owe, in a great measure, our wonderful success. A change in either the one or the other would have changed entirely, in all probability, the destiny of our country.

The bearing of this digression on the point under consideration will be readily perceived. We have grown, indeed, to be so powerful, that the aborigines can no longer resist us by force, and when there is no danger that the arts of civilized life would be lost by the spreading out of our population; but the aboriginal population would not, therefore, cease to perform an important function in our future growth and prosperity, if properly treated. They are the land-wardens or keepers of our public domain, until our growth and increase of population require it, as the means of new settlements. But till then, our interests, no less than justice to them, require that their occupancy should continue; and if the extinguishment of their title should continue to outrun the regular demand of our population for settlement as rapidly in proportion hereafter as it has heretofore, it is difficult to conceive the confusion and difficulty which must follow. Those we now experience are nothing to those which would come. That such must, however, prove to be the case to a great extent, if our land system continue as it is, I hold to be certain. The cause, as I have said, is inherent in the system as it exists; and, if not corrected, will impel our population, by its necessary operation, from the states to the territories, and from them to the Indian possessions; which I shall now proceed to explain.

The system, as it now stands, embraces three powerful causes, all of which conspire to produce these results: pre-emption, as proposed by this bill, before survey and sale; the auction system, under its actual operation; and a fixed minimum for all the lands, be the quality or the time which they have been offered for sale what they may. They act together, and jointly contribute to the results I have attributed to them.

My friends from the new states, who are so much attached to pre-emption as proposed by this bill, must excuse me for speaking my opinion freely of

their favourite measure. The consequences involved are too important to keep silence.

What, then, is this pre-emption principle? and how does it operate as a part of the existing land system? It is neither more nor less than to say to every one, when the Indian title is extinguished to a new portion of the public domain, that you may go, and search, and take all the choice parts, the fertile spots, the favourable localities, the town sites, or whatever other advantages any portion may possess, at $1 25 per acre; and that not to be paid till the lands are offered at auction, which may be many years thereafter. What, then, is its operation, but to give pick and choice of the public domain to the active and enterprising, who are best acquainted with the tract of country to which the Indian title is extinguished, with the speculating capitalists, who may choose to associate with them? It is like spreading out a large table, having a few choice and costly dishes intermixed with ordinary fare, and opening the door to the strong, and the few that may be nearest, to rush in and select the best dishes for themselves, before the others at a distance can enter and participate. And can we wonder, with such advantages, that there should be an active and powerful interest constantly at work to extinguish the titles of the Indians in rapid succession, without regard to the demand of our increasing population; to spread out table after table, that they may gorge their appetites on the choicest dishes, and slake their thirst with the most costly wines; leaving the ordinary fare, with the crumbs and bones, to the rest of the community?

But this is not all. After this picking and choosing, under the pre-emption, as it has heretofore operated, and which it is now proposed to make prospective and perpetual, comes the auction system; that is, the sales of the lands at vendue to the highest bidder. Nothing could be more just and equal, if fairly carried out; but it is notorious that the very opposite is the case under its actual operation. Instead of leaving the lands to be disposed of to the bids of individuals, according to their conception of the value of each tract, the whole is arranged beforehand, by combinations of powerful and wealthy individuals, to take the choice of the lands left by the pre-emptioners, and to run down all individual competition, so that no one can obtain what he wants without joining them; and thus another powerful interest is united with the former, to extinguish the Indian title-to spread out another table.

The next feature of the system so much lauded operates the same way—I refer to what is called the minimum price; that is, of fixing one invariable price of $1 25 an acre for all lands not sold at auction, without regard, as has been said, to quality, or the time it has been in market. The effect of this, with a quantity on hand to which the Indian title is extinguished, so far exceeding the demand of the community, is to sink the value of all the unsold land which has not been offered at auction to a price below the minimum, except a small portion of the best, which is annually purchased. Taking the aggregate of the whole of the lands in the new states, it would, according to its estimated present value by the Committee on the Public Lands, not be worth, on an average, more than 161 cents per acre. The result is, that no one is willing to give the minimum for the inferior or less valuable portion. Hence comes that great and growing evil, of occupancy without purchasing; which threatens the loss of the public domain, unless arrested by some speedy and decisive remedy. It has already extended far beyond what is thought of by those who have not looked into the subject, and is still rapidly progressing. I have taken some pains to ascertain to what extent it has extended in two of the states-Illinois and Alabama. It is probable that there are not less than thirty thousand voters in those states, residing on public lands as mere occupants, without title. In a single congressional district in Alabama, there are, by estimate, six thousand voters. But, as great as this evil is, it is not all. The fixed

minimum price co-operates with the pre-emption and auction systems to impel emigrants, especially of the more wealthy class, to turn from the states to the territories, where the land has been less culled over; and from the territories to the Indian lands, for the same reason; thus urging forward our population farther and farther, and driving before them the Indian tribes, unmindful of the dispensation of a kind Providence, which placed them as a restraint on the too rapid dispersion of our population.

There is another and powerful cause co-operating to the same result, which must not be passed unnoticed. I refer to the vast expenditures in the last twelve or fifteen years, in holding treaties with the Indians, and in extinguishing their titles, including reservations, and removing them to the West; equalling, in some instances, the fee-simple value of the lands, and in many others not much less. These immense expenditures, amounting, in the period specified, I know not to how many millions (not less, certainly, than forty or fifty), have made such treaties a great money-making affair, the profits of which have been divided between influential Indian chieftains and their white associates, and have greatly contributed not only to increase the force of the other causes in the too rapid extinguishment of Indian titles, but to diffuse widely the baneful spirit of speculation.

Such are the inherent defects of the system, and the results to which they have led, and must continue to lead, so long as it can find subjects on which to operate, if not remedied. The measure I have proposed would apply an efficient remedy, as far as the public lands in the new states are concerned. The combined action of graduation and pre-emption applied to lands which have been offered for sale, as provided for by the amendment I offered, would, in a few years, convert the occupants without title into freeholders; while, at the same time, it would tend powerfully to prevent the population of the new states from emigrating, and turn towards those the tide of emigration from the old states, and, to the same extent, counteract the too rapid spreading out' of our population, and extinguishment of the titles of the Indians. But nothing can effectually remedy the defects of the system but a radical change. What that ought to be, would require much reflection to determine satisfactorily; but it seems to me, on the best reflection I can give it, that if, in lieu of public sales at auction, a system of graduation and pre-emption had been introduced from the first, fixing a maximum price sufficiently high when the lands are first offered for sale, and descending gradually, at short intervals of one or two years, to the present minimum price, and then, in the manner proposed in the measure which I have brought forward, giving the right of pre-emption at every stage, from first to last, to the settlers, it would have averted most of the evils incident to the present system, and, at the same time, have increased the revenue from the lands. It would have checked the spirit of speculation, concentrated our population within the proper limits, prevented the too rapid extinguishment of Indian titles, and terminated our ownership and administration of the lands in the new states, by disposing of them within a moderate period of time, and prevented most of the mischievous consequences which have been experienced. The introduction of such a change, or some such, founded on the same principles, in reference to lands not yet offered for sale in the territories, and the portion of the public domain lying beyond, and to which the Indian title is not yet extinguished, would, in combination with the measure I have proposed, go far to restore the system to a healthy action, and put a stop to the farther progress of the evil, and remedy, in a great measure, those already caused. I throw out these suggestions for reflection, without intending to propose any other measure, except the one I have already.

Ккк

XXX.

SPEECH ON THE CASE OF M'LEOD, JUNE 11, 1841.

THE business before the Senate being the motion of Mr. Rives to refer so much of the President's Message as relates to our foreign affairs to the Committee on Foreign Affairs,

Mr. Calhoun said: I rise with the intention of stating, very briefly, the conclusion to which my reflections have brought me on the question before us.

Permit me, at the outset, to premise, that I heartily approve of the principle so often repeated in this discussion, that our true policy, in connexion with our foreign relations, is neither to do nor to suffer wrong, not only because the principle is right of itself, but because it is, in its application to us, wise and politic, as well as right. Peace is pre-eminently our policy. Our road to greatness lies not over the ruins of others, but in the quiet and peaceful development of our immeasurably great internal resources-in subduing our vast forests, perfecting the means of internal intercourse throughout our widely-extended country, and in drawing forth its unbounded agricultural, manufacturing, mineral, and commercial resources. In this ample field all the industry, ingenuity, enterprise, and energy of our people may find full employment for centuries to come; and through its successful cultivation we may hope to rise, not only to a state of prosperity, but to that of greatness and influence over the destiny of the human race, higher than has ever been attained by arms by the most renowned nations of ancient or modern times. War, so far from accelerating, can but retard our march to greatness. It is, then, not only our duty, but our policy to avoid it, as long as it can be, with honour and a just regard to our right; and, as one of the most certain means of avoiding war, we ought to observe strict justice in our intercourse with others. But that is not of itself sufficient. We must exact justice as well as render justice, and be prepared to do so; for where is there an example to be found of either individual or nation that has preserved peace by yielding to unjust demands?

It is in the spirit of these remarks that I have investigated the subject before us, without the slightest party feelings, but with an anxious desire not to embarrass existing negotiations between the two governments, or influence, in any degree, pending judicial proceedings. My sole object is to ascertain whether the principle already stated, and which all acknowledge to be fundamental in our foreign policy, has, in fact, been respected in the present case. I regret to state that the result of my inves tigation is a conviction that it has not. I have been forced to the conclusion that the Secretary of State has not met the peremptory demand of the British government for the immediate release of M'Leod as he ought; the reasons for which, without farther remark, I will now proceed to

state.

That demand, as stated in the letter, rests on the alleged facts, that the transaction for which M'Leod was arrested is a public one; that it was undertaken by the order of the colonial authorities, who were invested with unlimited power to defend the colony; and that the government at home has sanctioned both the order and its execution. On this allegation the British minister, acting directly under the orders of his government, demanded his immediate release, on the broad ground that he, as well as others engaged with him, was "performing an act of public duty, for which he cannot be made personally and individually responsible to