and says

 The gentleman told the world. that the public lands fought not to be treated as n treasure" He now tells us, "they must oe treated as 50 much treasure" what tne oe- liberate opinion Of the gentleman on thls sub iect may be, belongs not to me 10 0eteEm'ne but, do not think he can, with the snaoow ot justice pr prOpriety, impugn1 my senunemS; while his own recorded opinions are ioentlcaI with my own. When the gentleman refers to the conditions of the grante under walcn tke United States have acquired these lands, l and insists that, as they are declared 10 pc "for the common benefit Of all the States' ] they can only he treated Hs SO much treasure think he has applied rule of construction 1 too narrow for the case. U, ln 'ne 0eCus ot cessiOn, it has been declared, that tnc Sra"ts 1 were intended for " the common Oeneht ol 1 all the States, it is clear. from other rrOVls- I ions. that they were not intended merely as SO much propertv: for, it is expressly declar' ed, that the subject of the grants ls tne cree ton 0r new States; and the United states, in accepting the trust, bind themselves |" tac''n- tate the foundation of these States, to be ad- mitted into the Uni0n with all the rlgnts ana privileges of the original States Th's, ST.

 was the great end to which all parties looked 1; and it is by the fuflment Of this high trust. 1 that L0G COUOIuOU UGUVut OA "A kuS SA"S" 1 is tO be best promoted. Sir, lot nc tell the gentleman, that in the part of the country in

 which live, we do not measure polit'cas

 benefits by the money standard. We consid- CT as moro valuable than gold, liberty, princi'

 pie, and justice. But, sir, if we are bound to { act on the narrow principles contended for by

 the gentleman, am wholly at d loss to con csve how he can reconcile his principles with 1 his own practice. The lands are, 1t seems, to 1 be treated "as SO much treasule," and must be applied to the " common benefit of all the States" Now, if this be 80, whence does he derive the ri ght to appropriate them for par tial and local objects! How can the gentle

 man consent to vote away immense bodies of these lands, for canals in Indiana and Illinois, to the Louis, file and Portland Canal, to Ken yon College, in Ohio, to Schools of the Deaf and Dumb, and ulher objects of similar de- scripson If gra. of this character can fairly be considered Ns made "fOr the com

 mon benefit of all the States" it can only be, because all the States are interested in the

 welfare of each-a principle which, carried to the full extent, drstroys all distinction be

 tween local and national objects; and is cer- tainly broad enough to embrace the principles

 for winch have ventured to contend. Sir the true difference between us, l take to be this the gentleman wishes to treat the public lands as great treasure, just as 80 much mo- . ney in the Treasury, to be applied to all Ob iects, constitutional and unconstitutional, tC which the public money is now constantly applied Iconsider it as sacred trust, which we ought to fHlRl, on the principles for which ' have contended.

 The Senator from Massachusetts has thol 1. proper to present in strong contrast the friend ~ y feelings ofthe East towards the West, witt . sentiments Ofan opposite character displayed $ by the South in relation to appropriations fol ,. a Internal Improvement. Now, sir, let it b' 7 rccollected that the South have made no pro - [ fessions I have certainly made none in thei behalf of regard for the West. It has beer , reserved to the gentleman from Massachu.

 sets, while he vaNnts his own personal devO. ton tO western interests, to claim for the en- tire section of country to which he belongs,

 an ardent friendship for the West, as mani

 tested by their support of the system of in-

 ternal Improvement, while he casts in our

 teeth the reproach that the South has mani-

 fssted hostility to western interests in Oppos.

 ing appropriations for such objects. That

 gentleman, at the same time, acknowledged

 that the South entertains constitutional scru- pies on this subject. Are We then, Sir, to

 understand, that the gentleman considers it a just subject of reprOach. that we respect our

 oaths, by which we are bound "to preserve,

 protect and defend the Constitution of the

 United States!" Would the gentleman havr

 us manifest our love to the West, by tramp ling under foot our constitutional scrurles :?

 Does he not perceive, that # tho South is to De Tepro0ched with unkindness to the West, in

 voting against appropriations which the gen

 tleman admits they could not vote for with

 out doing violence to their constitutional opin. ions, that he exposes himself to the question !:

 whether, if he were in our situation. he could

 vote for these appropriations regardless of his

 scruples? No sir, will not do the gentleman

 SO great injustice. He has fallen into this er-

 TOT from not having duly weighed the force

 and effect of the reproach which he was en-

 deavoring to cast upon the south. In relation

 to the other point, the friendship manifested

 by New-England towards the west, in their

 support of the system of Internal Improve | nent. the gentleman will pardon me for say ing, that think he is equally unfortunate in having introduced that topic. As that gen. tleman has forced it upon us, however, can not suffer it to pass Wnnoticcd. When the gentleman tells us that the appropriations for

 Internal Improvement in the West, would, in

 almost every instance. have failed. but for

 New England votes, he has forgotten to tell

 us the '0hen, she ho,c and the eretore-this

 new horn zeal for the west sprung up in the

 bosom of New-England. If we look back

 on'y lew years, we will find, in both houses