1837 Martin Van Buren - Reduce and Graduate the Price of Public Lands

In 1865, Horace Greely was attributed with the famous phrase "Go West, young man".  He wrote, "Washington [D.C.] is not a place to live in. The rents are high, the food is bad, the dust is disgusting, and the morals are deplorable. Go West, young man, go West and grow up with the country. That was 1865, but 30 years earlier, this young newspaper editor and member of the Whig party opposed the Democratic plan to reduce and graduate the price of public lands, saying that it would "drain of both population and capital from the old States" leaving their fields "desolate by the rushing tide of emigration to the more genial West". In 1837, Horace Greeley feared that President Martin Van Buren was telling the men of his time to "Go West, young man" and he did not agree.

Horace Greely and the Whig party opposed the Democratic plan and instead supported Kentucky senator Henry Clay's distribution bill which would require a portion of the net proceeds from public land sales be given to the states in which the land was located, with the other states participating in the balance according to their representation in Congress. As part of Henry Clay's "American System", the proceeds would be used for "internal improvements, educational needs, state debts, or colonization of free negroes” (Congressional Debates, 22 Cong., I Sess., pp. 1). Despite objects from westerners that the bill would discourage land sales and keep prices high, the bill passed both the house and the senate. Democrats accused Henry Clay and his "American System" of trying to keep the price of public lands high to keep the poor working for low wages in their factories rather than emigrating to the west for a new life. The bill met its demise when Andrew Jackson pocket vetoed the bill. Henry Clay reintroduced the bill in 1834, but it failed again and was countered with a Democratic plan to reduce or graduate the price of public lands.

In 1837, when Martin Van Buren entered his first year as president, wide-spread speculation and dwindling reserves in state banks sent the country into a financial panic. Money became scarcer and it became more difficult for the common man to afford the minimum price of $1.25 per acre that public land sales were going for. It was an opportunity for Van Buren and the Democrats to overcome the Whig's opposition to their demand for graduation and reduction of public land prices. Henry Clay and his fellow Whigs were not going down without a fight, they laid out claims that any plan that would reduce the price of land over time would lead to evil and devious plans by men to take a gamble and play game of speculation waiting until the cost of the land was near nothing. Horace Greely, in 1838 then a member of the Whig party wrote the following about the Democratic plan.

"But let Graduation and Pre-emption laws be passed and it will be to his interest to cover all the good land and good timber he possibly can with a claim to pay for nothing, improve nothing and do nothing beyond what his pressing necessities shall dictate, until Graduation shall have reduced the cost of his territory to half price, quarter price, or nothing at all. If the evil genius of mankind were to devise a plan for the express purpose of cursing the Great West with a population of dissipated drones and gambling land speculation, he could build on no better principle than Graduation.

The price of Public Lands is the barometer which regulates the general value of landed property. Pass a Graduation Law, and you unsettle the value of real estate—for years to come. The drain of both population and capital from the old States to the new is already severely felt but of this no one complains. But graduate the price of lands so as to afford a prospect that they will eventually be sold at fifty cents or nothing, and the bleak fields of the North will not only be left desolate by the rushing tide of emigration to the more genial West but the hardly acquired property of the pioneers of the West will be greatly depreciated in value" - Horace Greeley

President Van Buren did not yet read those words of Horace Greeley but he addressed the concerns straight on in his state of the union address in 1837, he took the opportunity to refute arguments being made by Mr. Greeley. In his state of the Union, President Van Buren discussed at length the sale of public lands. He called it one of the "most important trusts confided to Congress." Van Buren started out by praising the history of public land sales and declared, "Whether in the new or the old States, all now agree that the right of soil to the public lands remains in the Federal Government, and that these lands constitute a common property, to be disposed of for the common benefit of all the States, old and new". He praised the process of selling public lands at moderate prices, stating that they allowed many individuals to purchase the lands. Public land sales were not only increasing the receipts of the treasury but also promoting rapid settlement of land and preventing large tracts of land from being accumulated into a few hands. By 1837, almost 70 million acres of land had been sold and the population in these new states and territories was now upwards of 2,300,000. Van Buren called it a "matter so vast, so complicated, and so exciting".

Still, there remained large tracts of land that at the current price, nobody wanted to purchase. Van Buren wrote discussions to reduce the sales of these large tracts of land was one of the most "perseveringly pressed" discussions occupying Congress in many years. Congress just could not agree on a resolution and these large tracts of land remained unsold resulting in "injury not only of the several States where the lands lie, but of the United States as a whole." Van Buren know a plan to graduate the price of the land sales over time "without reference to any other circumstances" was an impossible sell. Following the lead of Mr. Greeley, many in congress opposed such a proposal believing that it would lead to buyers holding off on purchases until the price lowered and that would in turn drive down the price of all public lands. Van Buren offered a compromise, suggesting that states should appraise the land and classify it based on tax value. By allowing the graduation process to consider the tax value and by restricting the sales to "limited quantities and for actual improvement", then perhaps his opponents could come on board and support the plan. Much of what Van Buren shared in his address looks to come from an 1837 report provided by the Committee on the Public Lands. The committee reported that in some districts only the "refuse lands" remained and at their current price may never be sold, but if the lands were gradually reduced in price over a period of five years or more, eventually it would sell. The report suggested that "many an honest poor man would thereby be enabled to procure a home that he could call his own". Eventually, these "refuse lands" would be a source of revenue of revenue for the states respectively as "cultivated fields and green meadows" replaced "unproductive forest".

Van Buren summed it up by sharing that "the means of acquiring an independent home would be brought within the reach of many who are unable to purchase at present prices; the population of the new States would be made more compact, and large tracts would be sold which would otherwise remain on hand." He added that "many persons possessed of greater means would be content to settle on a larger quantity of the poorer lands rather than emigrate farther west in pursuit of a smaller quantity of better lands". Van Buren did his best to alleviate the fears of Whigs of those who followed the word of Horace Greeley fearing that reduced land sales would drive their workforce westward. In his address, Van Buren seems to directly addressing the concerns of Horace Greely would pen just a few months later by explaining that his policy would not promote "emigration up the almost interminable streams of the West to occupy in groups the best spots of land, leaving immense wastes behind them". Van Buren explained that to do so would enlarge the "frontier" beyond what the government could protect, but instead would encourage a slower progress across the western frontier, as the settlers form more densely populated communities better able to protect themselves from Indian tribes.

"The report of the Commissioner of the General Land Office, which will be laid before you by the Secretary of the Treasury, will show how the affairs of that office have been conducted for the past year. The disposition of the public lands is one of the most important trusts confided to Congress. The practicability of retaining the title and control of such extensive domains in the General Government, and at the same time admitting the Territories embracing them into the Federal Union as coequals with the original States, was seriously doubted by many of our wisest statesmen. All feared that they would become a source of discord, and many carried their apprehensions so far as to see in them the seeds of a future dissolution of the Confederacy. But happily our experience has already been sufficient to quiet in a great degree all such apprehensions. The position at one time assumed, that the admission of new States into the Union on the same footing with the original States was incompatible with a right of soil in the United States and operated as a surrender thereof, notwithstanding the terms of the compacts by which their admission was designed to be regulated, has been wisely abandoned. Whether in the new or the old States, all now agree that the right of soil to the public lands remains in the Federal Government, and that these lands constitute a common property, to be disposed of for the common benefit of all the States, old and new. Acquiescence in this just principle by the people of the new States has naturally promoted a disposition to adopt the most liberal policy in the sale of the public lands. A policy which should be limited to the mere object of selling the lands for the greatest possible sum of money, without regard to higher considerations, finds but few advocates. On the contrary, it is generally conceded that whilst the mode of disposition adopted by the Government should always be a prudent one, yet its leading object ought to be the early settlement and cultivation of the lands sold, and that it should discountenance, if it can not prevent, the accumulation of large tracts in the same hands, which must necessarily retard the growth of the new States or entail upon them a dependent tenantry and its attendant evils.

A question embracing such important interests and so well calculated to enlist the feelings of the people in every quarter of the Union has very naturally given rise to numerous plans for the improvement of the existing system. The distinctive features of the policy that has hitherto prevailed are to dispose of the public lands at moderate prices, thus enabling a greater number to enter into competition for their purchase and accomplishing a double object--of promoting their rapid settlement by the purchasers and at the same time increasing the receipts of the Treasury; to sell for cash, thereby preventing the disturbing influence of a large mass of private citizens indebted to the Government which they have a voice in controlling; to bring them into market no faster than good lands are supposed to be wanted for improvement, thereby preventing the accumulation of large tracts in few hands; and to apply the proceeds of the sales to the general purposes of the Government, thus diminishing the amount to be raised from the people of the States by taxation and giving each State its portion of the benefits to be derived from this common fund in a manner the most quiet, and at the same time, perhaps, the most equitable, that can be devised. These provisions, with occasional enactments in behalf of special interests deemed entitled to the favor of the Government, have in their execution produced results as beneficial upon the whole as could reasonably be expected in a matter so vast, so complicated, and so exciting. Upward of 70,000,000, acres have been sold, the greater part of which is believed to have been purchased for actual settlement. The population of the new States and Territories created out of the public domain increased between 1800 and 1830 from less than 60,000 to upward of 2,300,000 souls, constituting at the latter period about one-fifth of the whole people of the United States. The increase since can not be accurately known, but the whole may now be safely estimated at over three and a half millions of souls, composing nine States, the representatives of which constitute above one-third of the Senate and over one-sixth of the House of Representatives of the United States.

Thus has been formed a body of free and independent landholders with a rapidity unequaled in the history of mankind; and this great result has been produced without leaving anything for future adjustment between the Government and its citizens. The system under which so much has been accomplished can not be intrinsically bad, and with occasional modifications to correct abuses and adapt it to changes of circumstances may, I think, be safely trusted for the future. There is in the management of such extensive interests much virtue in stability; and although great and obvious improvements should not be declined, changes should never be made without the fullest examination and the clearest demonstration of their practical utility. In the history of the past we have an assurance that this safe rule of action will not be departed from in relation to the public lands; nor is it believed that any necessity exists for interfering with the fundamental principles of the system, or that the public mind, even in the new States, is desirous of any radical alterations. On the contrary, the general disposition appears to be to make such modifications and additions only as will the more effectually carry out the original policy of filling our new States and Territories with an industrious and independent population.

The modification most perseveringly pressed upon Congress, which has occupied so much of its time for years past, and will probably do so for a long time to come, if not sooner satisfactorily adjusted, is a reduction in the cost of such portions of the public lands as are ascertained to be unsalable at the rate now established by law, and a graduation according to their relative value of the prices at which they may hereafter be sold. It is worthy of consideration whether justice may not be done to every interest in this matter, and a vexed question set at rest, perhaps forever, by a reasonable compromise of conflicting opinions. Hitherto, after being offered at public sale, lands have been disposed of at one uniform price, whatever difference there might be in their intrinsic value. The leading considerations urged in favor of the measure referred to are that in almost all the land districts, and particularly in those in which the lands have been long surveyed and exposed to sale, there are still remaining numerous and large tracts of every gradation of value, from the Government price downward; that these lands will not be purchased at the Government price so long as better can be conveniently obtained for the same amount; that there are large tracts which even the improvements of the adjacent lands will never raise to that price, and that the present uniform price, combined with their irregular value, operates to prevent a desirable compactness of settlements in the new States and to retard the full development of that wise policy on which our land system is founded, to the injury not only of the several States where the lands lie, but of the United States as a whole.

The remedy proposed has been a reduction of the prices according to the length of time the lands have been in market, without reference to any other circumstances. The certainty that the efflux of time would not always in such cases, and perhaps not even generally, furnish a true criterion of value, and the probability that persons residing in the vicinity, as the period for the reduction of prices approached, would postpone purchases they would otherwise make, for the purpose of availing themselves of the lower price, with other considerations of a similar character, have hitherto been successfully urged to defeat the graduation upon time.

May not all reasonable desires upon this subject be satisfied without encountering any of these objections? All will concede the abstract principle that the price of the public lands should be proportioned to their relative value, so far as can be accomplished without departing from the rule heretofore observed requiring fixed prices in cases of private entries. The difficulty of the subject seems to lie in the mode of ascertaining what that value is. Would not the safest plan be that which has been adopted by many of the States as the basis of taxation--an actual valuation of lands and classification of them into different rates? Would it not be practicable and expedient to cause the relative value of the public lands in the old districts which have been for a certain length of time in market to be appraised and classed into two or more rates below the present minimum price by the officers now employed in this branch of the public service or in any other mode deemed preferable, and to make those prices permanent if upon the coming in of the report they shall prove satisfactory to Congress? Could not all the objects of graduation be accomplished in this way, and the objections which have hitherto been urged against it avoided? It would seem to me that such a step, with a restriction of the sales to limited quantities and for actual improvement, would be free from all just exception.

By the full exposition of the value of the lands thus furnished and extensively promulgated persons living at a distance would be informed of their true condition and enabled to enter into competition with those residing in the vicinity; the means of acquiring an independent home would be brought within the reach of many who are unable to purchase at present prices; the population of the new States would be made more compact, and large tracts would be sold which would otherwise remain on hand. Not only would the land be brought within the means of a larger number of purchasers, but many persons possessed of greater means would be content to settle on a larger quantity of the poorer lands rather than emigrate farther west in pursuit of a smaller quantity of better lands. Such a measure would also seem to be more consistent with the policy of the existing laws--that of converting the public domain into cultivated farms owned by their occupants. That policy is not best promoted by sending emigration up the almost interminable streams of the West to occupy in groups the best spots of land, leaving immense wastes behind them and enlarging the frontier beyond the means of the Government to afford it adequate protection, but in encouraging it to occupy with reasonable denseness the territory over which it advances, and find its best defense in the compact front which it presents to the Indian tribes. Many of you will bring to the consideration of the subject the advantages of local knowledge and greater experience, and all will be desirous of making an early and final disposition of every disturbing question in regard to this important interest. If these suggestions shall in any degree contribute to the accomplishment of so important a result, it will afford me sincere satisfaction.

In some sections of the country most of the public lands have been sold, and the registers and receivers have very little to do. It is a subject worthy of inquiry whether in many cases two or more districts may not be consolidated and the number of persons employed in this business considerably reduced. Indeed, the time will come when it will be the true policy of the General Government, as to some of the States, to transfer to them for a reasonable equivalent all the refuse and unsold lands and to withdraw the machinery of the Federal land offices altogether. All who take a comprehensive view of our federal system and believe that one of its greatest excellencies consists in interfering as little as possible with the internal concerns of the States look forward with great interest to this result."

References

“First Annual Message.” First Annual Message | The American Presidency Project, 5 Dec. 1837, www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/first-annual-message-4

Gordon, Hal (13 July 2006). "Go West Young Man ..." The Speechwriter's Slant (blog). Archived from the original on 5 September 2008. Retrieved 13 February 2009.

EICHERT, MAGDALEN. “HENRY CLAY’S POLICY OF DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROCEEDS FROM PUBLIC LAND SALES.” The Register of the Kentucky Historical Society, vol. 52, no. 178, 1954, pp. 25–32. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/23373691. Accessed 27 Mar. 2024.