i%* 






Class, 
Book. 



F/?s 



? 



■z? 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 



LETTER TO PRESIDENT GRANT 



UN Till-; Sl'BJKCT OF TIIK KEJIOVAI, 



NATIONAL ( APIT 



BY L. U. HE AVIS. 






Si- - '^~L^^ 4 4'' 



ST. LOUIS: 

MiaSOURI DEMOCRAT BOOK AXD JOB TRTNTIN-U IIOa*«, 

1S71. 



c^^ 



^ 



THE 



REMOVAL OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL. 



[from the liURLINGTOX ( IOWA ) IIAWKEYE.] 

" Mr. L. U. Rcavis, of St. Louis, addresses a long and ex- 
haustive letter to President Grant on the subject of the removal 
of the National Capital. The letter is published in the New 
York Tribune of Saturday, occupying between six and seven of 
the broad columns of that paper, set in small type. If the 
President reads it — there's the rub — and duly ponders its facts 
and arguments, it will be safe to say that he will know a good 
deal more about the matter than the majority of our public men. 
We hope Mr. R.'s letter may be printed in pamphlet form, and 
scattered widely over the country. It contains just such facts 
and suggestions as the people need to form an intelligent judg- 
ment relative to the important question." 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL. 



LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT. 



[Fro»i rhe N'cio York Tribune, January 2S, 1S71.'\ 

PRESIDENT grant's REMARKS ON THE REMOVAL OF THE CAPITAL 
CONSIDERED — THE ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF REMOVAL — HISTORY 
OF THE CAPITAL QUESTION — OPINIONS OF AMERICAN STATESMEN 
' — IMPERATIVE DEMAND FOR REMOVAL. 



To His Excellency Ulysses S. Grant, 

President of the United States: 

Sir: The friends of Capital removal would have been con- 
tent, during the preliminary discussion, with your silence upon 
the subject until you deemed it of sufficient importance to give 
it your special consideration in an official way. But as you have, 
from- time to time during the agitation, intimated your marked 
friendship for the people of Washington City, and the eternal 
retention of the Capital at that place, and manifestly shown 
indifference toward the West, especially by your recent official 
and individual action in virtual opposition to the removal, it 
becomes the imperative duty of the friends of Capital removal 
to hold you alike responsible and subject to the same criticism 
invoked by those who do not comprehend the magnitude of the 
question. I shall therefore assume to call you to account upon 
this great subject, so vital to our national life, and arraign you 
before the great men of the Republic, both living and dead, who 
have stood in different quarters of the country and beheld alike, 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 5 

with prophetic eyes, the rising glory and greatness of the nation, 
and foreseen the coming changes in the governmental dominion, 
and the redistribution of political and material po\\-er over the 
■wide domain of the continent. 

I shall bring to bear for your consideration an array of facts 
and arguments bearing directly and indirectly upon this subject, 
against which no reasonable man will dare attempt an answer. 

That the public may be fully advised of the inciting cause that 
called out this discussion, and that you be reminded of the 
grounds upon which it is based, I here insert your words as I 
found them in the dispatches from Washington City, bearing 
date of December 21, 1870, as follows: 

"WELCOME TO CONGRESS. 

"A large number of citizens, including bovs in blue and 
members of the fire department, had a torch- light procession to- 
night, to give a Avelcome to Congress. They marched to the 
Executive mansion, and a committee was met by the President 
in the vestibule. Judge Bai-rett addressed the President, saying 
they came to tender their' respects to him, the man vt'hom every 
true American delighted to honor. 

" tresident's speech. 

" The President made the following reply :, ' I can not thank 
you appropriately for the honor you have done me in calling on 
me this cold night, nor would I detain those out-doors to hear a 
speech, knowing that they are to make calls at other places, and 
on gentlemen who, no doubt, will thank them in appropriate 
terms. I will only say it has always been my desire to see this 
great nation built up in a manner worthy of a great and growing 
Republic like ours. 

" ' As to the removal of the Capital, I think it improbable in 
the extreme ; nor do I believe the removal should be subject to a 
mere majority of the representatives of the people, elected for a 
single term. I think the question of the removal, if ever pre- 
sented, should go through the same process, at least, as amend- 
ments to the Constitution, even if there is constitutional power 
to remove it, which is not settled. This language may seem 



• THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

unpopular i'or a person coming from that part of tlie country 
where I belong, but it is nevertheless expressed with earnestness 
and without reserve. Gentlemen, I thank you for your attention 
and kindness.' " 

Now, Mr. President, what you think on the subject of the 
removal of the Capital is simply the expression of an inconsid- 
erate individual opinion. Is it possible that a man in your official 
position would express himself so loosely on so great a subject 
as the one under consideration ? You say, as to the removal of 
the Capital, you think it improbable in the extreme. This ex- 
pression is unquestioned evidence that you have not weighed the 
.subject in your mind. Do you think it improbable that th'e 
Mississippi is larger than the Potomac ? Do you think it improb- 
able that Missouri is larger than all the New England States ? 
And do you think it improbable that she possesses more valuable 
resources than they do ? and that the national debt could be dug 
out of her soil tauch sooner and in greater abundance than it 
could be taken from the mountain system of the West, as you 
declared in your message one year ago ? You say you believe 
the removal should not be subject to a mere majority of the rep- 
resentatives of the people. This expression, Mr. President, still 
more betrays your inconsiderate action on the subject. Do you 
forget that this is a government of majorities ; that the popular 
will of the people expressed in the ballot-box, or by their repre- 
sentatives in Congress, is the governing attribute and law of the 
nation? It was for these principles that you so bravely contended 
on the battle-field, and by the exercise of this principle you were 
elevated to your present oflBcial position. 

But it is not my object, Mr. President, to address you with 
analysis and criticism, but to. vindicate, against your opposition, 
the cause of Capital removal, by systematic and irrefutable 
argument, in the following manner : 

I. The Right of Discussion. 

The right to discuss all questions relating to the well-being of 
this people and nation is inherent ; it is a privilege derived from 
the organic nature of the government, and alike the same in all 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. » 

the States, and to all the people. Standing upon this hroad basis 
of; political right, you must know that the subject of the removal 
of the National Capital is a legitimate subject for the American 
people to discuss. 

II. The Basis of Discussion. 

At the base of the discussion : 

1. It is assumed by the friends of Capital removal that the 
fathers of the country, in the exercise of the power to remove 
the seat of the general government from New York to its present 
place, legislated for themselves as they thought best, and selected 
for the new seat of government a place central to the then exist- 
ing States of the young Republic. It was their right to legis- 
late for themselves ; they did so according to their judgment and 
their wants. 

2. It is assumed by the friends of Capital removal that this 
people have the same right to legislate for themselves as our 
fathers had for themselves, and that it is their right to legislate 
for themselves according to their judgment and their wants, and 
that the wants of this people, though the same in principle, are 
not the same in character. 

The Capital that was then suited to the wants of an infant 
nation, born on a narrow strip of land on the shore of the ocean, 
is not now suited to the wants of a Republic almost embracing 
an entire continent, and commanding the commerce of the world 
and the admiration of the nations of the earth. 

3. It is assumed by the friends of Capital removal that the 
seat of government, at its present place, is not adapted to the 
national life, nor to the wants of our continental people ; that, at 
every stage of the national growth, Washington City is rendered 
less fit to be the Capital of this nation, and that therefore the 
Capital ought to be removed to some more central and convenient 
place in the wide domain of this continental commonwealth. 

4. It is assumed by the friends of Capital removal that, in- 
asmuch as this is "a government of the people and by the people 
and for the people," its Capital ought to be central and conve- 
nient to the great majority of the people who are to be its guar- 
dians and defenders. 



O THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

5. It is assumed by the friends of Capital removal that the 
center of human power in this nation ^Yill be fixed and organized, 
at an early date, in the center of the productive energies of the 
country, and that against the truth of this assumption no argu- 
ment can be made. 

In elaboration of the foregoing propositions as the basis of 
ihe discussion, your attention is asked, Mr. President, to the 
argument of the question. 

III. The i\RGUMENT. 

At the very outset of the presentation of the argument, let me 
suppose that some opponent to the movement asks, Why do we 
want the Capital removed? What good will its removal subserve 
to the general interest of the government ? I answer : That the 
Capital of a nation, in its true relations to government, must 
serve a double purpose. Not only is it necessary for it to be the 
seat of the national legislation, but with equal necessity must it 
be representative in its influence and character upon the nation. 
All history furnishes evidence of the truth of this position. 
Scarcely was there a nation of antiquity whose capital was not 
also its representative city. The middle ages furnish the strong- 
est evidence of this truth in their city States. Where the power 
is, there is essentially the capital, and it is a universal law that 
power is essentially central. It is imperfection alone that estab- 
lishes it outside the center. All laws, human and divine, are at 
best only means to regulate the action and tendency of man and 
things ; and if the conventional power to regulate by legislation 
is fixed within the influence of the absolute power of control, 
the reciprocal influence of the one upon the other Mill be most 
beneficial to the whole people. This is Avhat the friends of this 
movement seek to establish in this great Republic, as the greatest 
fact of its material life. 

Akin to this great fact is the important one of locating the 
seat of government in a republic where v it will best subserve the 
business interests of the people wii:h the government. In a re- 
public like ours, with vast territories unsettled, lands to dispose 
of, railroads to build, banking and various commercial interests 
to protect, a vast number of people have business to transact 



TiiE :;ational capital movable. y 

fifom year to year at the seat of government; and for this, too, 
it is the right of the people to demand its removal to the central 
part of the country. 

In support of these claims the following facts are offered as 
testimony : 

When the first Congress, sitting at New York in 1790, selected 
the present site for the national government, the United States, 
exclusive of the Northwestern Territory, embraced a narrow strip 
of the Atlantic Slope consisting of an area of 3-1:1,75(3 square 
miles, and had 3,929,827 inhabitants — scarcely more than the 
present population of the State of New York. Not a foot of 
land did our government own beyond the Mississippi, nor did she 
prize her possessions beyond the Appalachian mountains of much 
value, for the Indian, the buffalo, the deer, and panther ruled 
supreme. 

In selecting a permanent seat of government, the Congress of 
1790 legislated in the special interest of the thirteen original 
States — legislated exclusively for themselves. This was their 
wisdom : appropriate and just to themselves and their times, but 
to us an error. They were a small band of people ; we are a 
continental people. Our national legislation must conform to 
our wants and our times, and cannot be gauged by the narrow 
limits of the old government of 1790- 

From an area of G10,512 square miles, including the North- 
western Territory, the national domain has grown to an area of 
2,950,264 square miles, exclusive of Alaska — more than three 
times as large as the old government, and embracing within its 
control the shores of two oceans, the greatest gulf, the mightiest 
lakes and rivers in the world. 

Of the vast domain which now composes our territorial extent, 
860,000 square miles lie east of the Mississippi, and 2,070,000 
west of it, exclusive of Alaska, which has 577,390 square miles. 
Thus it will be seen that by the Louisiana purchase in 1800 we 
acquired more than double the territorial area, and the full con- 
trol of the great rivers and the inexhaustible mineral wealth of 
the mountains ; and these acquisitions have been made since the 
location of the Capital at Washington. 



10 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

POPULATION. 

Tliis is tlie most interesting and valuable part of the whole 
argument. As I have already stated, the entire population of 
our country in 1790, -when Washington was made the seat of 
government, was 3,929,827. In the space of eighty years we 
have grown to nearly 40,000,000, as our present census will 
show. Of these, less than 19,000,000 belong to the Atlantic 
Slope, 19,000,000 to the Mississippi Valley, and at least 2,000,- 
000 to the Pacific Slope. This will give to the West a prepon- 
derance of population. 

Of this entire population there will not be an average of four- 
teen to the square mile of our vast domain, exclusive of Alaska. 
But, from the rapid increase of our people, may we not look for 
all these numbers to be swelled far beyond our ordinary concep- 
tion in the brief space of a lifetime? The increase of popula- 
tion in the Northwest, during the decade between 1850 and 18G0, 
was G7.9 per cent., while the ratio of increase in the whole 
country was 35.52. The popular vote of 1852 shows the North- 
west to have cast 29.46 per cent, of the entire vote. But, aside 
from any local causes that may have existed to produce a more 
rapid increase of population inone locality than another, there is 
an exact law of human development which, when properly applied, 
solves this problem of population with exact mathematical accu- 
racy. Malthus laid down the law to b'e this : That the productive 
power of healthy, well-clad, well-fed, and well-lodged people, was 
so great that fully two children would be born for every person 
who died within a given time. Therefore, he fixed thirty-three 
years as the time necessary for any people to double their number. 
George Combe, commenting upon the doctrine of Malthus, wrote 
that in the new States of North America the population doubled 
every twenty-five years, independent of immigration. 

Dr. Elder, a prominent writer on Political Economy in our 
own land, writes that our population doubles every twenty-three 
and a half years ; and the recent calculations of our government 
are based upon twenty- three years as the time necessary for 
doubling. With these facts before us, what may we not expect 
to be our increase before the century closes ? Taking the calcu- 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 11 

lation of Dr. Elder as being correct, inay we not assume that, 
before the century expires, more than 100,000,000 people will 
occupy the present area of our country ? And with the increased 
facilities for immigration, and the rapid development of our 
resources, the child is now born that will see more than 300,000,- 
000 people residing upon our present domain. 

Of these, not more than 70,000,000 will inhabit the Atlantic 
Slope, while more than 230,000,000 will inhabit the interior 
plain and the region beyond it. 

COMMERCE. 

But, Mr. President, let us pass from the subject of population 
to a consideration of the commerce of the country. And here I 
must express my regret that I cannot present to you an analysis 
of the facts which our new census will reveal ; yet I am happy 
to say that I can make ray argument strong without them. The 
Atlantic seaboard of the United States extends about 3,500 miles, 
and the Mississippi and its tributaries afford an inland navigation 
of 30,000 miles, upon the bosom of which now floats an amount 
of commerce three times as great in value as the whole foreign 
commerce of the country. 

In former times our trade with foreign parts was looked upon 
as our most important interest. It is now dwarfed in compari- 
son by the transportation and handling of domestic produce for 
domestic markets. 

In 1867 the entire products of the United States were ^1,900,- 
000,000. Its exports were less than one-fifth of this amount, 
leaving four-fifths to be exchanged between the States. It is 
said that at the present time not more than one-fifteenth of the 
Imsiness of New York city is based upon foreign commerce. 

The Mississippi drains 2,445,000 square miles, which is more 
than half the number of square miles in the United States. The 
surface contains 768,000,000 acres of the finest land in the 
world. It has space for one hundred and fifty States the size of 
Massachusetts, and, were its population in the same proportion, 
it would contain more than five times the present population of 
the whole United States. At this time not more than one acre in 
live is under cultivation, and the vast resources of coal and min- 



12 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

erals have hardly begun to be fairly developed. The value of 
the commerce of the Mississippi is estimated at $2,000,000; 
and the Agricultural Bureau, basing its calculations upon past 
results, estimate that the cereal products of the Northwest will, 
in 1900, amount to 3,121,970,000 bushels. In addition to these 
vast statements of wealth, we are enabled to bring in as rein- 
forcements the productions and commerce of the Pacific Slope, 
which, in itself, has the strength and value of an empire, and far 
transcends the commerce of the old government of 1790 ; and 
in whatsoever manner we examine the commerce of our country, 
whether interiorly, upon the lakes, adjoining the Gulf, or upon 
the Pacific Slope, we find the assurance that in either case a few- 
more years will show an equal, if not greater, commerce than the 
Atlantic Slope can afford. 

There are now in the United States more than 50,000 miles of 
railway, three-fifths of which lie west of the Appalachian moun- 
tains, in the Valley States and Pacific Slope. They have been 
constructed at a cost of about $2,000,000,000 ; and yet not half 
of our vast country is supplied with roads. . Another twenty-five 
years will almost double the number of miles already built. In 
addition to the wonderful s^'Stem of railways, who can conceive 
of the mightiness of our future shipping upon the ocean and 
inland waters, all of which will contribute to swell our national 
greatness at home and our fame abroad? 

POLITICAL, 

There are also political reasons, Mr. President, Avhy the Capi- 
tal should be removed to the West. The balance of power in the 
National Legislature has already passed west of the Appalachian 
mountains, and belongs to the States and Territories lying be- 
yond. And when we consider how great the disproportion will 
be in the National Legislature when the " New West " is carved 
into States, we cannot fail to see the justness of the demand for 
a more central location of the National Capital. 

Look at the facts for one moment. The Atlantic Slope has an 
area of 423,197 square miles, which is divided into seventeen 
States. Under the Constitution they are all allowed thirty-four 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. l3 

Senators and one litindrcd and twenty Representatives in tbe Na- 
tional Legislature. The Mississippi Valley lias an area of 
2,445,000 square miles, with less than one-third of its territory 
made into States. It now has eighteen States, which, under the 
Federal Constitution, are allowed thirty-six Senators and one 
hundred and fifteen Representatives in the National Legislature. 
The Pacific Slope has an area of 627,256 square miles, part of 
which is made into three States, which are entitled to six Sena- 
tors and five Representatives in the National Legislature. Alaska 
has an area of 577,390 square miles, and is large enough to 
make more than fourteen States as large as Ohio. Another view 
shows 860,000 square miles east of the Mississippi river, which 
is already divided into twenty-seven States, including Louisiana 
and West Virginia. These send fifty- four Senatoi's and two 
hundred and five Representatives to the National Legislature. 
West of the Mississippi river ^we have 2,070,000 square miles, 
exclusive of Alaska, which, at the least calculation, ought to be 
made into fifty new States, each one of them being larger than 
Ohio, and containing 40,000 square miles. 

Again, the States of the Atlantic Slope have thirty-four Sen- 
ators and one hundred and twenty Representatives in the National 
Legislature. The Mississippi Valley, together Avith the Pacific 
Slope, has forty-two Senators and one hundred and twenty Rep- 
resentatives ; this places the balance of power in the Senate west 
of the Alleghanies, and makes an equal representation in the 
House of Representatives. But how long, Mr. President, will 
this remain the order of political representation in the National 
Legislature '.'' Not only will the West gain by the apportionment 
under the new census, but also will new States succeed each other 
in coming into the Union, as we go forward in our national growth 
and progress. ' 

But you say, Mr. President, that you are not willing to submit 
this question to a majority of the representatives of the peoplo. 
Ah, Mr. President, that was .a fatal expression for you to make ; 
the great people all over the country heard you speak the word. 
Are you to sit in the chair of Washington and dictate terms to 
the people, which he dared not do, and to object to the people's 
representatives doing that which is their plain and lawful duty? 



14 TUE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

Do you claim the right to exercise such unlawful authority ? li" 
you do, let me advise you to reverse your decision, for no power 
on earth can enforce it. It will prove to be a more heathen dec- 
laration than that of Xerxes writing to Mount Athos, and order- 
ing it to get out of the way of his march, or his vain attempt to 
chain the Hellespont and stay its ebbing waves ; or than that oi: 
Mohammed, asking the mountain to come to him ; the sequel 
showed that Mohammed had to go to the mountain ; and with 
equal propriety may it be said that the National Capital will 
and must gravitate to the great center of population. 

But, Mr. President, aside from the question of numerical and 
political power which belongs to the West, and its claims as the 
center of our territory, there is a paramount necessity for locat- 
ing the seat of government of the nation in the midst of its 
material powder. The life of a nation is made doubly secure 
when united with the strongest anti greatest commercial and ma- 
terial interests of her people ; for, thus united, they complement 
each other, and the security and perpetuity of the one becomes 
the security for the perpetuity of the other. Nothing can be 
more absurd than to imagine that the life and perpetuity of this 
Republic is as secure for the future, with the seat of government 
at Washington — a distant place on the outskirts of the country, 
with no material power or prestige — as it would be in a central 
position in the Mississippi Valley, where the great vitalizing 
heart of the Republic is destined to beat in harmony with its 
onward progress and greatness. 

lY. Congressional Discussion of the Subject. 

Mr. President: Having presented an incontestable array of 
arguments, facts and figures, to prove an entirely different state 
of things in the political, commercial, and material character of 
our country than that which existed at the time of the location 
of the present Capital, thus proving beyond question the neces- 
sity of a change of location, I will now present, as subordinate 
to the argument, a synopsis of discussions made in Congress, at 
different times in our country's history, upon the subject of 
Capital removal. To save unnecessary labor in this matter, I 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 15* 

bere quote from a paper prepared from the debates by Mr. 
George Alfred Townsend, as follows : 

"The main argument of the tradesmen and property-holders 
of the village of Washington, for the retention of the Capital 
among them, is that this spot was ' consecrated by the preference 
of all the patriots.' It is so common for statements of this 
kind to be made without authority and circulated through 
ignorance, that I recently took opportunity to overhaul the 
venerable ' Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the 
United States,' published by Gales & Seaton, as well as the 
debates of later Congresses, published by John C. Rives, to see 
upon what foundation stood the warrior's pride. And, as I 
anticipated, the forefathers approached this subject with the 
same practical sagacity which we are called upon to assume in 
reconsidering it. They looked for no omens or sacred birds to 
fix their choice. They took Washington City as a compromise 
against the wish of a majority of them, and particularly afTainst 
the wish of the Eastern State and Middle State people and 
statesmen. They spoke of the importance of getting as far 
westward as possible, as far back as 1789, and they did go as far 
West as practicable, considering the narrow strand of population 
and the condition of American highways at that time. From 
the moment Washington was fixed upon, the common sense of 
the East revolted, and a smothered dislike of the site was mani- 
fested till 1814, when by three several votes it was resolved to 
go to a city further north, and this resolution obtained the vote 
of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Langdon 
Cheves, of South Carolina, and the removal was only prevented 
by the extraordinary efforts of the people of Washington village, 
who built at their own expense a new edifice for Congress — since 
called the Old Capitol Prison. After this the discontent con- 
tinued, till, in 1816, Alexandria, with more pride than Washing- 
ton, demanded to be retroceded to Virginia, so that she could 
have a self-existent anatomy ; and then the call for a movement 
into the Valley of the Mississippi became distinct and decided. 
That there may be no mistake in this matter, I append all the 
material points of the debates extant, of the three periods 
referred to. There is not the remotest indication anywhere that 



.16 THE NATIONAL CAPIIAL MOVABLE. 

Wasliington City would have had a ghost of a chance for being 
the Capital site ten years after its foundation. Virginia alone 
kept the seat of Government on the Potomac." 

WASHINGTON SELECTED IN DEFERENCE TO THE WEST. 

On the 27th of August, 1789, Congress sitting in New York 
city, Mr. Scott, of Pennsylvania, introduced the resolution in 
Congress which provided for a permanent Capital, in these 
words : 

Resolved^ That a permanent residence ouo^ht to be fixe'l for the g'eneral 
;?overnment of the United States at some convenient place, as near the 
center of wealth, population, and extent of territory, as may be con- 
sistent with convenience to the navio^ation of the Atlantic Ocean, and 
having due regard to the particular situation of the western country. 

The terms of this resolution are almost exactly applicable to 
the present movement for readjusting " the center of wealth, 
population, and territory." 

Among the few debaters recorded on this proposition were 
Scott, Jackson of Georgia, Goodhue of Massachusetts, Lee of 
Virginia, and the illustrious James Madison. 

Goodhue "favored the Susquehanna, ^^either at Harrisburg or 
opposite Havre de Grace." 

Jackson said that "upon this subject depended the existence 
of the Union. The place of the seat of government was im- 
portant in every point of view. It might be compared to the 
heart of the human body ; it was a center from which the princi- 
ples of life were carried to the extremities, and from these might 
return again with precision." 

In 18G9 Jackson would have found this heart in the extremi- 
ties, like the bulb in a thermometer. 

Scott thought " the principles of the Union were the principles 
of equal justice and reciprocity. He conceived the question 
now before the House as grand a link as any in the Federal 
chain. The future tranquillity of the United States depended as 
much on this as on any other question that ever had or could 
come before Congress. It was a justice due to the extremities 
of the continent to adopt such a measure." 



THE NATIO>rAT, (,/?.TAL MOVABLE. 17 

Had Scott so spoken hi tht^se - lys he would have been accused, 
in the garbage prints of Washnigton, ol" "speculating in St. 
Louis corner lots !" 

Mr. Lee, of Virgin. a, (.^i_,..t Horse Harry), said: "■ A place 
as nearly central as a conv^eiiiont communication with the Atlantic 
Ocean and an easy accees ro the western territory will permit, 
ought to be selected and established as the permanent seat ol the 
government of tb- United States. Will gentlemen say that the 
center ol governij'ont should not be the center of the Union?- 
Will they say or restore brethren are to be disregarded? These 
are momentous c^;^: itlcvxtions, which should lead the House to a 
conclusion. If they are disregarded it will be an alarming cir- 
cumstance to the people of the Southern States, who have felt 
their alarms already." 

This was the same man who delivered over' Washington the 
funeral eulogy of " First in war, first, in peace, and first in the 
hearts of his countrymen." He was Washington's neighbor, and 
bis argument is directly in the line of the Mississippi Valley. 

The entire argument of those urging the Potomac for the site 
of the Capital was that it was the highway to the West, and that 
the West should be consulted, while the Northern men pressed 
the Susquehanna as being the true route westward. 

MADISON ON A NEW CAPITAL SITE. 

Perhaps the greatest authority, however, was the illustrious 
James Madison, who spoke as follows on September 3, 1789 : 

"An equal attention to the rights of the community is the 
basis of republics. If we consider, Sir, the effects of legislative 
power on the aggregate community, we must feel equal induce- 
ments to look for the center in order to find the present seat of 
Government. Those who are most adjacent to the seat of legis- 
lation will alwa3^s possess advantages over others. An earlier 
knowledge of the laws, a greater influence in enacting them, and 
a thousand other circumstances, will give a superiority to those 
who are thus situated. If we consider the influence of the 
Government in its Executive Department, there is no less reason 
to conclude that it ought to be placed in the center of the Union. 



18 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

' Id ought to be in a situation to command information from every 
part of the Union ; to "watch every conjecture ; to seize every 
circumstance that can be improved. The Executive eye ought 
to be placed where it can best see the dangers which threaten ; 
and the Executive arm -whence it may be extended most effec- 
tually to the protection of every part. In the Judiciary Depart- 
ment, if it is not equally necessary, it is highly important that 
the Government should be equally accessible to all. With respect 
to the Western territory, we are not now to expect it, for it would 
be an affront to the understanding of our fellow-citizens of the 
Western waters, that they will be united with their Atlantic 
brethren on any principle than that of equality and justice. We 
had every inducement, both of interest and prudence, to lix on 
the Potomac as most satisfactory to our Western brethren. He 
defied any gentleman to cast his eye, in the most cursory man- 
ner, over a map and say that the Potomac is not much nearer 
this center than any part of the Susquehanna. lie granted that 
the present center of population is nearer the Susquehanna than 
the Potomac. But are we choosing a seat of Government for 
the present moment only V lie presumed not I" 

This speech was quoted in 1846 in favor of the removal of 
the Capital to the Ohio, by Mr. Pennybacker, in Congress. 
There is not a word in it which docs not justify and encourage 
the present movement for a new Capital city in the great Western 
Valley. A Committee of seven were appointed to, select a 
central site, by a vote of only 72 to 71 : and at the head of this 
Committee was Mr. Fisk, of New York. 

THE llEMOVAL AGITATION IN 1814. 

On the 2Gth of December, 1814, Mr. Fisk, of New York, rose 
in the House and introduced the following resolution : 

'•'■Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to inquire into tlie ex- 
pediency of removing- the seat of Government during tlie present session 
<)i Congress, to a place of greater security and less inconvenience than 
the City of AVashington, with leave to report by bill or otherwise. ' ' 

By a vote of 79 to o7 the resolution was taken into immediate 
consideration, and debated till October 15. At this time the 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 19 

r'apitol wings were in ashes, and Congress met in the unfinished 
Patent Office. I append the material extracts from the debates. 

Mr. Fisk, of New York — "Where shall Congress sit with 
safety and convenience? Some designate one place, some 
another ; but few imagine that the councils of the nation will 
continue here. The confidence and the credit of the nation is 
identified with the security of the public councils and the safety 
of the public records." 

Mr. Lewis, of Virginia — "A temporary removal only is 
contemplated ; but once started, the Capital will never return. 
For the last ten or twelve years similar attempts have been made." 

Mr. Fisk, of New Tork — " On a removal to any other place, 
the inconveniences of this would appear by contrast so strongly 
that the Government could never be induced to return." 

Mr. Grosvenor, of New York — "The gentleman from South 
Carolina conceives that a removal will be striking our colors. 
• Wait,' says that gentleman, ' till the enemy comes and chases 
you off.' That is the very dishonor I dread from remaining — 
the very disgrace I wish to avoid. The gentleman from Tennes- 
see says if his house was burned he would not move off his farm. 
But suppose a neighbor would politely offer him a clean bed and 
excellent food and accommodations, would he refuse the use of 
them and rather sleep in his barn ? Let gentlemen ask them- 
selves fairly, Were they willing to appropriate the money of the 
people of the United States to build a Capitol where it might be 
destroyed in twenty days ? Let them remove to a place of safety, 
where it would not be necessary to expend $10,000,000 or 
$15,000,000, or any other sum, for the simple defense of 
Congress." 

Mr. Oakley, of New Y^ork — "It was owing to the forbear- 
;\nce of the British that Congress had now a single roof to cover 
their heads. They had been told that this place was defensible 
up to the moment when the enemy arrived. Immediately after- 
v/ard another city on the Atlantic coast had been attacked. 
Whatever respect he might feel for the inhabitants of this Dis- 
H'ict, their interests could not for a moment enter into competi- 
tion with the interests of the nation." 



20 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

Mr. Hansow, of Maryland, " entertained very great contempt 
for the people of Washington." 

The Speaker. Langdon Cheves, S. C, said: "This District 
cannot be defended, except at immense expense — an expense, 
perhaps, half that required to carry on the war." 

Richard Stockton, of New Jersey, made his maiden speech in 
favor of removal, October 5, 1814. He said: "Gentlemen 
had only to look around to survey the District to judge correctly. 
A permanent seat of government is n*t required by the Consti- 
tution. A power to fix the seat of government for centuries — 
forever — who can believe that the people of the United States 
would have invested such a power in the Congress of 1789 ? — a 
power to fix a permanent seat of government, without regard to 
the alterations, improvements, resolutions, and changes which 
would naturally be produced by a good government, an increas- 
ing population, and the settlement of the vast regions of the 
western country. No, Sir. The great Washington landlord was 
not to be compensated because he converted barren land into 
city lots, and made a fortune out of his sales. Was he to be 
compensated because he was prevented from making more ? The 
speculator, too, must abide by his loss. The government minion 
was not to be paid for being torn from his hold ! The people of 
this District were entitled to no more than the same kind of 
defense afforded to their fellow-citizens. The removal of the 
Capital ought to be decided on principles exclusively public. He 
had made up his mind, with reluctance, that a removal was 
essential to the honor and interest of the nation. The dispersion 
and capture of the member.s of Congress would gratify the pride 
and resentment of the English nation more than any other oper- 
ations their army on the coast could perform. The Military 
Committee estimated that 20,000 men, costing $30,000 a day, 
could defend the Capital. The people of the country would not 
stand this one month, one week, or one day!" 

OTHER VOICES OF 1814. 

Mr. Pearson, of North Carolina, said at the same time : 
**From the first moment we met here we have found almost 



THE NATIONAL CAriTAL MOVABLE. 21 

every member north of: Maryland, and a few of the hardy sons 
of the West, apparently dissatisfied with their accommodations." 
Mr. Grosv'^enor, of New York, alluded to the disposition of the 
friends of the District to kill the bill by forcing a vote upon it 
in empty session, and said: "Until the permanence of this site 
be decided by a full vote, there is not one citizen who ought to 
have confidence in Washington City. Gentlemen ought to deal 
liberally, and let the business take the usual course ; otherwise, 
perpetual agitation would ensue." 

Mr. Fisk, of New York, said that " we were now 400 miles 
from the most important seat of war, and the cost of daily and 
expeditious communication Avith the lake frontier amounted to a 
greater sum than the removal of the public offices. To have all 
these inconveniences merely in consideration of the interests of 
the people of this District, would be perverting the constitutional 
principle which gives Congress exclusive legislation over this 
District, and, instead of that, would be giving the District control 
over Congress." 

Mr. Wright, of Maryland, was not Avilling any longer to sus- 
pend the people of this city by their eyelids. He hoped they 
would come to a speedy and eternal decision. 

Among those who voted for removal were Daniel Webster, Mr. 
Alston of North Carolina, Ezra Butler, Ingersoll of Pennsyl- 
vania, Kent of New York, . Cyrus King of Massachusetts, 
Timothy Pickering, John Reed, and Richard Stockton. 

RETROCESSION OF ALEXANDRIA. 

Another strong demonstration of the state of feeling on this 
subject was exhibited on the 8th of May, 1846, and at various 
sessions before and subsequent to that time and the date of the 
retrocession of Alexandria. It was on this question that the 
voice of the West was first heard for removal. Senator William 
Allen, on July 2, said : 

" The location of the seat of Government on the Eastern 
seaboard gave the commercial cities a preponderating influence 
in the councils of the United States — five hundred-fold to one 
over the same number of people in the vast interior. They had 



22 THE NATIONAL CAriTAL MOVABLE. 

no Committees from the banks of the Missouri, or even tlie Ohio, 
' lobbying ' in these halls to regulate tariff duties. No ; they 
had no association in those Western regions, and delegates to 
the Capital with the view of obtaining laws to meet the views of 
individual and sectional interests, instead of the wants and the 
wishes of the great men of the nation. Fifteen hours before 
a bill was introduced into Congress, Wall street had knowledge 
of it, and a delegation was on hand to regulate the details of the 
bill. Thus had their tariffs been formed ; thus the commercial 
interest overruled all others. The great men of the people lived 
on the soil — four-fifths of them — and it was in the center that 
the seat of Government should be located. The Alexandrians 
seem to have had no fear of losing the Capital." 

Robert M. T. Hunter, of Virginia, "spoke of the importance 
of the retrocession to the people of Alexandria, and depicted in 
glowing colors the blight that had fallen on that city by reason 
of her dependence on the General Government ; her declining 
commerce ; her premature decay ; the desolation which had como 
upon her, not by the scourge of God, but by the hands of man." 

Mr. Bayley, of Accomac, Va., "asked Congress to decide 
the question of retrocession upon its own merits, with reference 
solely to national considerations, and without any sort of reference 
to the local interests or influence of Virginia." 

John A. McClernand^ of Illinois, said that Congress had full 
power to change the location of seat of Government, and, in 
that case, by the operation of law, the District, including terri- 
tory and people, would revert to the State ceding it. 

V\'. W. Payne, of Alabama, " objected to the bill because we 
had paid a very large amount of money for the portion of the 
District of Columbia south of the river Potomac. Was it con- 
templated to refund this money— nof; less than $1,000,000 ? The 
true object of this bill was to saddle the debt of the corporation ' 
of Alexandria upon Congress— another $1,000,000." 

Finally, the old Missouri Trojan expressed himself upon the 
Washington Monument question — a similar scheme to the big 
Fair first projected here by sundry plumbers and newspaper 
carriers. 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 23 

Mr. Thomas II. Benton, in the Senate, January 8, 1848, said: 
" I am entirely opposed to any action by which an association of 
individuals can lay hold of the name of the United States for 
the purpose of going abroad to levy contributions on the human 
race. If individuals assume to erect a monument, let them do it 
as individuals, but let no opportunity be afforded them of using 
the name of the Congress of the United States in furtherance of 
their individual schemes." 

Thus stands history on the removal of the Capital. The voice 
of self-sacrificing patriotism calls us to look for the center of 
population, present and to come; to cease expending money on 
the verge of the East, but to "build deep ahd strong the ever- 
lasting Jerusalem, upon the bank of humanity's Jordan — the 
river of the Mississippi Valley." 

Mr. President, I would ask your especial attention to the 
soundness of the argument made by Mr. Madison, and how nearly 
like it have the friends of Capital removal in the recent discus- 
sions made their arguments. 

y. The Constitutionality of Removal. 

But are you ready to say, Mr. President, that although the 
argument is good, there is a constitutional question in the way ? 
Well, I am not a constitutional lawyer, and therefore cannot dis- 
cuss the constitutionality of the question ; but I will venture to 
submit to you a few plain facts, which take precedence over all 
technical objections. Referring to the "Federalist," I find the 
Constitution of the United States, as agreed on in Convention, 
September 17, 1787, and which was adopted September 13, 
1788, contains the following clause: 

Article I, under section 8 : " That Congress shall have power 
to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such 
District, not exceeding ten miles square, as may, by cession of 
particular States and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat 
of Government of the United States, and to exercise like authority 
over all pla,ces purchased by the consent of the Legislature of 
the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, 
magazines, arsenals, dock-j^ards, and other needful buildings." 



24 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

Now, Mr. President, I -wish you to bear in mind that the above 
is the only clause in the Constitution touching the subject of the 
seat of government, and that, -while the Constitution was adopted 
September 13, 1788, the bill for the removal of the Capital from 
New York to its present place was passed July 9, 1790, by the 
Srst Congress during 'its second session. Now, Sir, I hold it to 
be true that the Constitution was framed and adopted without 
any possible reference to a special and permanent location of the 
seat of government. In fact, several efforts were made, before 
and after the adoption of the Constitution, to secure the Capital 
at different places. Congress sat a while at Philadelphia, then 
at Princeton, New Jersey, from thence adjourned to Annapolis. 
In October, 1783, it was resolved that buildings for the use of 
Congress should be erected on the banks of the Delav^are. A 
few days later a resolution was offered that buildings for a similar 
purpose should be erected on the Potomac, some members con- 
ceiving that there wiis no way to settle the question but to have 
two Capitals. Again, in the debates upon the bill which resulted 
in the location of the Capital at its present place, some members 
desired its permanent location. Mr. Madison replied to such : 
"It is not in our power to guard against a repeal. Our acts are 
not like those of the Medes and Persians, unalterable ; a repeal 
iS a thing against which no provision can be made." 

Again, those who pretend to believe in a constitutional prohi- 
bition couple with their argument the cession of the District of 
Columbia as the foundation of their faith. Now, what are the 
facts about that? Was not the Virginia portion of the District 
of Columbia re-ceded by Congress to the mother State in 1846? 
Was that act unconstitutional ? Was President Polk's proclama- 
tion, declaring the retrocession to Virginia, unconstitutional ? 
Did not John C. Calhoun say, in the debate on the subject, that 
•' according to his judgment there could not be any constitutional 
objection, unless there was somcvrherc in the Constitution a pro- 
hibitory clause? It was in the power of the government to 
remove its seat if it thought proper, unless there was some 
express provision to the contrary. Now, he saw no such provi- 
sion in the Constitution. It belonged to the gen,tlemen to prove 
that the retrocession would be unconstitutional. If they had a 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 25 

right, which he held to be incontestable, to remove the seat of 
government, the right of parting -with any portion of it was 
apparent. The act of Congress, it was true, established this as 
the permanent seat of government; but they all knew that an act 
of Congress possessed no perpetuity of obligation." 

The Hon. Pteverdy Johnson, also being a member of the Senate 
from Maryland, took part in the discussion on retrocession. He 
went into a review on the constitutional provision relative to the 
establishment of a seat of government, and to the proceedings 
of Congress with rejrard to its location within the District, and 
insisted that there was nothing in either to prohibit the retroces- 
sion of the ten miles square to the State from Avhich it was taken, 
or any portion thereof. He supposed that an absolute necessity 
might arise for the removal of the seat of government, from the 
possession of the District by an enemy. Mr. Benton held that 
the question with him was, whether the people of Alexandria 
were willing to have the territory re-ceded. The constitutionality 
involved in the question was finally settled by the passage of the 
bill and the consequent retrocession. That act of itself ought 
to be sufficient to settle the constitutionality of the question, and 
prevent avi-y further foolish cavil upon the subject. No, Mr. 
President, there is no constitutional obstacle in the way. The 
Constitution is no more in the way of removing the Capital than 
it is in the way of removing forts, magazines, arsenals, dock- 
yards, and other needful government buildings. Let no intrig- 
uing Washington politician deceive you by the whisperings of a 
corrupt heart and a Aveak understanding. Believing, Mr. Presi- 
dent, I have fully answered this ill-considered objection, I will 
pass on to a consideratioli of the proper place for the Capital, 

YI. The Proper Place for the Capital, and the Reasons 

Why. 

1. I lay it down as a law of civilization that human power in 
any well-regulated government is developed and organized to its 
greatest capacity in the midst of the productive energies of the 
country over which the government extends. 

2. I lay it down as an axiomatic truth that in a constitutional 
or representative government, where all the power is in the people, 



26 THE NATIONAL CAriTAL MOVABLE. 

its exercise by the majority iiilieres in them from the very nature 
of: the government. 

In support ol: these two fundamental propositions I offer all 
the facts in the geology, the topography, and the climate of our 
country, as well as all our political and material facts and the 
rapid tendency of our national growth and civilization, and hold 
that they all evidence the justness and the priinc necessity of 
a central location for the National Capital. The new Capital 
should be located in a place the most convenient and the most 
accessible to all the citizens of the United States, and the most 
secure against foreign invasion and domestic insurrection. 

Midway in the Valley of the Mississippi, between the two 
great oceans, the future center of the commerce, manufactures, 
mineral resources, population, productions, and wealth of this 
continent can only be found. The geological strata, the con- 
figuration, the topography, and the isothermal lines of North 
America show that the center of the Mississippi basin is the 
place already designated by nature as the future seat of a 
national Government which novf controls and will embrace the 
continent. 

The Capital of a Government which embraces a continent 
must itself be continental, attesting the magnitude of the power 
it represents by its own greatness, and by its influence radiating 
from the center to the remotest circumference. 

The old Capital at New York was removed to Washington in 
1790, as a place more central to the old colonial States (on the 
margin of the Atlantic seaboard), and the Capital ought to be 
removed now for the same reasons that existed then, so as to fix 
it finally in the present center of the old and new States, in the 
Valley of the Mississippi, Avhich is as central to the continent as 
it is to the Republic of the United States. No future acquisi- 
tions of territory on this continent could affect the centrality of 
a Capital located in the middle of the Valley of the Mississippi. 

The rapid increase of commerce, of manufactures, of agri- 
cultural protlucts, of mineral developments, and of population 
demonstrate that in a few years this valley, with its tributaries, 
will contain two-thirds of the population and develop three- 
fourths of the productions of the United States and Territories ; 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 27 

anj in fifty years from to-day, upon the ratio of increase for tlie 
last half century, it will contain about eight-tenths of all tho 
population and Avoalth of the nation. As the natural center of 
the population and v.-oalth of the nation, it is the -fit and neces- 
sary seat of the political center of the Government, -where the 
people and the Government are necessarily brought in daily 
contact for the common benefit of both. The Creator has placed 
the heart in the center of our bodies for the perfection of the 
circulation of the blood, whose functions it is to vitalize and 
warm our systems ; and so a political seat of a representative 
system like ours should be located at the heart of the country, 
where the ebb and flow of the tides and currents of political 
opinion will traverse the most direct route from the center to the 
extremities and back again. Such a central location of a politi- 
cal power of a representative government will do much to pre- 
serve the nation against all forms of anarchy or despotism. The 
great political considerations point to the establishment of a 
central national capital as one of the necessary safeguards for 
the preservation of a representative form of government. 

The present Capital of the nation is more remote from the 
Pacific States and Territories than Constantinople is from Great 
Britain, or St. Petersburg from Spain or Morocco. 

YII. Prophetic Testimony. 

Mr. President : To aid the argument and to strengthen the 
whole facts which I have thus far presented for your considera- 
tion, I desire to call your attention to the prophetic testimony in 
support of the position of the friends of Capital removal on this 
question. This part of the subject should properly begin with 
Plato, and come down through the idealistic minds of intervening 
ages ; but, for brevity, I will refer you to the Hon. Charles 
Sumner's Prophetic Voices about America, in the Atlantic 
Monthly of September, 1867, where you will find a vast array 
of prophetic testimony in favor of the future empire of the 
American continent. The testimony given in the last half cen- 
tury bears more directly upon the question under consideration, 
and therefore is in a great measure submitted as follows : 



"28 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

Looking bejonJ to the future growth of our Continental Gov- 
ernment, Henry Clay said, in a speech made in the United States 
Senate, January, 1824, on the extension of the Cumberland 
road, and replying to the opposition of Eastern members to 
Western improvements: "Not to-day, nor to-morrow, but this 
Government is to last, I trust, forever ; we may, at least, hope 
it will endure until the wave of population, cultivation, and intel- 
ligence shall have washed the Rocky Mountains and mingled with 
the Pacific. Yes, Sir, it is a subject of peculiar delight to mc 
to look forward to the proud and happy period when circulation 
and association between the Atlantic and the Pacific and the 
Mexican Gulf shall be free and perfect as things are at this 
moment in England." 

In a speech made by Thomas H. Benton in the United States 
Senate, jMarch 1, 1825, on the occupation of the Oregon river, 
he said: " Within a century from this day a population greater 
than that of the present United States will exist on the west side 
of the Rocky Mountains. I do not deal in paradoxes, but in 
propositions as easily demonstrated as the problems of Euclid. 
Here, then, is the demonstration : Divide one portion of this 
continent into five equal parts, and there will be found, in the 
Valley of the Mississippi, three parts ; on the east side of the 
Alleghany Mountains, one part; on the west of the Rocky 
Mountains, one part. Populatiuii will distribute itself accord- 
ingly three parts in the valley, and one part on each of the 
appurtenant slopes. 

Within a century the population of the whole will be 160,- 
000,000, of which 100,000,000 will drink the waters which flow 
into the Mississippi, and 60,000,000 will be found upon the 
lateral streams which flow east and west, toward the rising and 
the setting sun. The calculation is reducible to mathematical 
precision. We double our numbers once in twenty-five years, and 
nnist continue to do so until the action of the prolific principle in 
man shall be checked by the same cause which checks it in every 
race of animals — the stint of food. This cannot happen with us 
until every acre of our generous soil shall be put in requisition ; 
until the product of more than 1,000,000,000 of acres shall be 
insufiicient to fill the mouths which feed upon them. This will 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 29 

require more people than a century can produce, even at the rate 
doubling once in twenty-five years — a rate which will give us 
160,000,000 in the year 1920 ; that is to say, 20,000,000 more 
than the Roman Empire contained in the time of Augustus 
Ctesar. A century is but a point in the age of a nation. The 
life of an individual often spans it ; and many are the children 
now born who will see the year 1020, and the accomplishment of 
the great events which their nurses believe to be impossible." 

The great Webster said in a speech in the Senate on the com- 
promise measures, January 25, 1850 : " Sir, nobody can look 
over the face of this country at the present moment, nobody can 
see where its population is the most dense and growing, without 
being made to admit, and compelled to admit, that ere long the 
strength of America will be in the Valley of the Mississippi." 
Said the lion. Horace Greeley, in speaking of the West: 
" Let her not be despised ! American Orientals may dream that 
wisdom has taken up her perpetual abode on the shores of the 
Atlantic, and that the genii of Art, of Science, of Literature, 
have planted their rosy grottoes on the sunny side of the Alle- 
ghanies ; but a thousand fancies never made one fact.. Like the 
swaddled Hercules, the West has already put out her infant arms 
and strangled two political dragons that were coiling about her 
cradle ; and as soon as she walks forth in the consciousness of 
matured strength, she will make a greater fluttering among the 
harpies that prey upon her interests than did the club of the 
hero among the Stymphalian vultures. Ill-founded contempt 
is a blow that always rebounds. The Assyrian contemned 
the Persians, while the Persians, like muskrats, were under- 
mining. the walls of Babylon. Haughty, learned, philosophic 
Greece, the conqueror of Xerxes, became a Turkish slave, and 
the fair daughters of Themistocles and Leonidas were bought 
and sold in the shambles of Smyrna. Rome despised the bar- 
barians, and the barbarians conquered Rome. CiTesar* overran 
Gaul with victorious legions, and now Gaul holds a standing 
army in the city of the Cassars. England would force America 
to drink Bohea, and America poured out for England a cup of 
gunpowder tea, the taste of which she has not yet got out of her 
mouth. Thus it is, Arms and Arts, in their onward progress, 



30 TEE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

have always pitched their tents near the setting sun, and the 
conquests of the one and the triumphs of the other have left 
fruits to ripen and decay on the track. The very relics of the 
ancient empires are now to be dug out of the soil. Civilization, 
like the ostrich in its flight, throws sand upon everything behind 
her; and before many cycles shall have completed their rounds, 
sentimental pilgrims from the humming cities of the Pacific 
coast will be seen where Boston, Philadelphia, and New York 
now stand, viewing in moonlight contemplation, with the melan- 
choly owl, traces of the Athens, the Carthage, and the Babel of 
the Western Hemisphere." 

At a later date, said the lion. Charles Sumner : " The Mis- 
sissippi A'alley speaks for itself as no man can speak. Give us 
peace, and population will increase beyond all experience ; re- 
sources of all kinds will multiply indefinitely ; arts will embellish 
the land with immortal beauty ; the name of Republic will be 
exalted until every neighbor, yielding to irresistible attraction, 
will seek a new life in becoming a part of the great whole, and 
the national example will be more puis?;int than army or navy for 
the conquest of the world." 

Said John Bright, the great English statesman, in speaking of 
the American Republic, its future greatness and grandeur: " 1 
."oe one vast confederation, stretching from the frozen North in 
one unbroken line to the glowing South, and from the wild bil- 
lows of the Atlantic, westward, to the calmer waters of the 
Pacific ; and I sec one people, and one law, and one language, 
and one faith, and over all that vast Continent the home of free- 
dom and refuge for the oppressed of every race and every clime." 

The great field of the West — "As the center of population 
and power is to be in the Mississippi Valley in the future, so 
must we look thither for the New Man who is to be the redeemer 
i)f our race and character. The Western man already shows 
larger, broader, and healthier development, spiritually speaking, 
than his brother in the East. He has never been cramped as yet 
ly any of the restraining forms of social ecclesiasticism ; his 
mind, like his eye, ranges over large extents, and is not content 
to sit down with itself after having acquired a little power over 
its fellows. As the Great West is bound to supply laws and 



TUE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 31 

men for the vast future of this continental country, so ■vvijl it 
furnish the religion, whose all-embracing forms are to invite the 
entire people into the simple secrets of its >Yorship/'' 

The Men of the West — "One who has not visited the West 
knows but little or nothing of the spirit of the Western men. 
There is an all-pervading zeal, energy, ambition, push-go-ahead, 
seen nowhere else. The blood of the Western man courses more 
rapidly in his veins than in the Eastern man or in the European ; 
and he thinks, talks, and. acts on a larger scale. The Western 
farmer wastes more in a year than the Eastern farmer saves. 
He may lack refinement, but he has a generous heart for his 
friends and a deal of pluck for his enemies. Ilis religion is less 
sectarian, less bigoted, and more broad, catholic, and truly 
Christian. 

Having submitted only a fragment 'of the strong but direct 
prophetic testimony in favor of the future empire of the great 
West, and the consequent demand for the Seat of Government, I 
now desire to call vour attention to some testimony bearing; 
immediately upon the question of removal. 

Since the days of Jefferson, far-seeing men have from time to 
time declared that the Capital of the nation would some df,y be 
removed from the Potomac to the Mississippi. At a dinner 
given to Mr. Jefferson, in Frederickstown, Md., in honor of the 
Louisiana purchase, a gentleman, whose name, I regret, is lost, 
while voluntarily defending Mr. Jefferson, against the silly slurs 
made about his purchase, said to the guests, as he unrolled the 
plat of a grant of land twenty-five miles square, including the 
site of Alton, Illinois: "You need not laugh at Mr. Jefferson, 
for some day," pointing at his map, " the Capital of the United 
States will be located upon this land." The laugh for the mo- 
ment was turned upon the stranger, and the inquiry made, how 
could people ever get there ? 

The stranger answered, "I don't know, but I think they will 
go there by steam." This occurred about 1804, long before 
railroads were constructed, even in the very infancy of the 
Republic. All along the line of our historic march have men 
declared the corning transfer of power from the Atlantic sea- 
board to the States west of the Alleghanies. In our own time 



32 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

thousands of the wisest men have declared the removal oi: the 
Capital to be inevitable. Said the Hon. Wm. H. Seward, in a 
political speech at St. Paul in 1860 : " The power oi: the Repub- 
lic is being gathered in the Mississippi Valley, and with that 
power will come the Capital of the country." 

Said the Hon. Charles Sumner: "I have no love for Wash- 
ington, and the removal of the Capital is only a question of 
time." 

Said Dr. Draper, in speaking of the Capital at Washington : 
"It has ceased to be the appropriate site for the metropolis of 
the continental Republic. Western influence predominating will 
draw the Capital into the Mississippi Valley, in absolute security 
from all foreign attack, and territorially central." 

Said the Hon. Richard Yates: "Now, Sir, when I see this 
country, wdien I see its vastness and its almost illimitable extent ; 
when I see the keen eye of capital and business fastened with 
steady, interested gaze upon the trade of the West, and all our 
Eastern cities in hot rivalry are reaching out their iron arms to 
secure our trade ; when I see the railroads that are centering here 
in St. Louis ; when I see this city, with 60,000 miles of railroad 
communication and 100,000 miles of telegraphic communication ; 
when I see that she stands at the headwaters of navigation, ex- 
tending to the north 3,000 miles and to the south 2,000 miles ; 
and when I see that she stands in the center of the continent, as 
it were ; when I see the population moving to the West in vast 
numbers; when I see emigration rolling toward the Pacific, and 
all through these temperate climes I hear the tramp of the iron 
horse on his way to the Pacific Ocean ; when I see towns and 
villages springing up in every direction ; when I see States form- 
ing into existence, until the city of St. Louis becomes the center 
as it were of a hundred States, the center of the population and 
the commerce of this country — when I see all this, Sir, I feel 
convinced that the seat of empire is to come this side of the 
Alleghanies, and why may not St. Louis be the future Capital of 
the United States ?" 

Said the Hon. Horace Greeley: "Washington seems to me 
an unfortunate location for our national metropolis, and sure to 
be rendered less acceptable by the march of events. Our Capi- 



THE IJATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. SS 

tal should be a great city. I prefer our greatest city, supporting 
a perfectly independent press, whereby all the acts and leanings 
of the Government would be criticised with absolute freedom 
from deflection in the hope of Federal patronage or the fear of 
its withdrawal. It should be surrounded by a dense, intelligent, 
spirited population, readily rallied in myriads to the defense of 
the national archives and treasures. It should be a focus of art, 
and literature, and refinement, thus inviting the presence and 
commanding the admiration of the choice spirits of the entire 
civilized world. I judge New York to be pre-eminently that 
city. I am quite sure that Washington is not. Let the subject 
be thoughtfully and generally canvassed, and I feel confident 
that a change will be approved and demanded." 

Under this head, Mr. President, I could quote to you tbe great 
majority of the ablest newspapers and public men of the country 
who are decided for the removal — men and newspapers that are 
not depending on a little Government patronage or Washington 
flattery for their bread and butter and social and political stand- 
ing — but I think the testimony sufficient, and hold that if you 
have been observant at all upon the tendency of the people upon 
this question you must know what the final decision wiil be. I 
therefore pass on to consider the unfitness of Washington. 

Vin. The Unfitness of Washington for the Capital op 
THIS Great Nation. 

It is assumed, Mr. President, by the friends of Capital re- 
moval, that the seat of Government at its present place is not 
adapted to the national life, nor to the wants of our continental 
people ; that at av.yj stage of the national growth Washington 
City is rendered leiss and less fit to be the Capital of this nation, 
and that, therefore, the Capital ought to be removed to some 
more central and convenient place in the wide domain of this 
continental commonwealth. 

No reasonable person would think of confining the full-grown 
man to the cradle of his infancy, but would urge him forth to 
the chamber and drawing-room suited to his manhood. So, too, 
of this Republic. The Capital that was once central to thQ 

a 



84 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 



nation — central to the States of the Atlantic .slope, and adapted 
to the wants of an infant people, has, in the multiplication of 
States to imperial Republic, left the Capital of its infancy on its 
outskirts, like a barren rock upon a desert shore. The Republic 
has grown to the West in magnitude and mightiness, until it 
now embraces the shores of an ocean greater than that upon 
which it was bom ; and in every conceivable view we can take of 
the subject, Washington appears unfit to remain the Capital of 
this great nation, and is only a sink-hole for demagogues, hire- 
lings, dependents, politicians, and office-seekers. Horace Greeley 
once said to me that there was not a heathen city in the world as 
corrupt as Washington. In fact, Mr. President, all arguments 
turn upon the unfitness of Washington to be the Capital of the 
nation, and the fitness of some central place in the great Valley 
to be the future home of the Government. 

Let us look for one moment at this. Ask the statesman for 
the philosophy of the integrity of government. He will tell 
you that it must be representative in all its relations to civiliza- 
tion and the great wants of man. Ask the moral philosopher 
for the philosophy of the integrity of civilization. He will tell 
you it, too, must be representative in its relations to government 
and the great interests of man. Now, in the name of heaven, 
Mr. President, is Washington City in any conceivable way repre- 
sentative of any of the interests of this great nation and people ? 
Not at all. It is the cradle, the home of the infant Republic, 
which was found in the bulrushes, but now is deliverer and 
benefactor ; Washington possesses no representative element 
either in character or locality. No commerce, no industry, no 
material power, no prestige, no nothing in common with the 
great representative, political, material, industrial, and progres- 
sive interests of this nation. Of the 50,000 miles of railroads 
in the country, stretching from ocean to ocean, and from the 
Lakes to the Gulf, she has only one. Her commerce is not equal 
to that of the meanest port on the coast of Africa. There is 
not published in the city — in the capital of the great Republic — 
a newspaper entitled to any consideration. They are all craven, 
toadying, and distempered papers. Col. Forney endeavors to 
publish a Court Journal — the Chronicle — an organ for the pur- 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 35 

pose ol: narrating from day to day all the toady doings of the 
so-called fashionable suppers, and dinners, and kissing parties 
&c., &c. When these things are so, Mr. President, is it not 
possible for you to rise to the dignity of your position — high up 
in the sphere of clear conception, and behold Washington as 
Jesus beheld Jerusalem, the city that killed the prophets and 
stoned them that were sent unto it. " Oh, venal city ! if a pur- 
chaser could be found thou art gone." But why are these things 
so ? I answer, it is in the very nature of things, it is in the 
philosophy of the integrity of a representative government, that 
its Capital must, in order to subserve its highest purpose, be in- 
separably identified with the great representative interests of the 
nation, the symbol of whose power it is. Civilization and gov- 
ernment must act in reciprocal relations. Washington has 
become totally unfit for the Capital of this vast Continental Re- 
public, because it embodies no representative interests common 
to the people of this great nation. While the Capital is at its 
present place, the Government, as represented by the law-makers, 
the administrators of the law, and the officiating officers, has 
none of the strength of the nation, none of its great vitalizing 
power and the public interests of the great people to lean upon, 
to di-aw vitality from. In the mighty growth of the Republic the 
nation is essentially left, at Washington, like a lone child forsaken 
on a desert rock. It grows weak and forgets the great world 
around it ; it yields to temptations and becomes demoralized. 

I speak to you, Mr. President, " the words of truth and sober- 
ness," and I say that the Capital must be removed from Wash- 
ington, as a necessity to the higher life of the Republic, and if 
you don't rise to the grandeur of the occasion, you will be left 
to the folly of your decision. There is still another reason for 
removing it which no power in the world can ignore. I refer to 
a demand which tho rising millions of this great valley will soon 
make for the Capital, A giant empire is now growing up here 
in the West, soon to be more powerful in peace than the mightiest 
nation known to history, and from it a voice will go forth of 
commanding power. It will speak in majorities, and its will must 
be obeyed. It will be as a great giant ruling a continent. Its 
veins will be coursed by blood from every land. Its arms of 



36 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

power will extend — one to the Atlantic, the other to the Pacific — 
giving parental protection to the children of the nation upon the 
shores of the Eastern and Western Oceans. Let me remind you, 
Mr. President, that those in power must prepare to hear the voice 
of this growing empire of the West, and to obey its will when 
it speaks in majorities. 

• IX. Objections Answered. 

Mr. President, thus far in the discussion by the people at large, 
but two objections that have the least possible weight have been 
urged against removal. 

1. The expense consequent on the change. This objection is 
trifling in the extreme, and certainly would not be urged by a 
sensible man when familiar with the facts. 

The Government owns, in the District of Columbia, 578 acres, 
divided into lots, parks, etc. This land was valued in 1868 at 
$13,412,293.26. The improvements on the land, including all 
the Government expenditures in the whole District for eighty years, 
amounted, June 30, 1868, to only $37,390,853.08. Now, Sir, 
the man's soul is small and sordid, indeed, who, in the face of 
these facts, will contend for one moment that the expense conse- 
quent upon the removal is an obstacle. I will venture to say that, 
if the opportunity was afforded, Missouri, and, I think, Illinois, 
Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, or Kentucky, would incu:^ a debt of $50,- 
000,000 if necessary to secure the Capital u^ on the respective 
soil of either; but the work is too great for this L.ighty nation to 
dicker about. It is beneath the dignity of the Republic to con- 
sider any proposition beyond the simple cession by a State of a 
new District, wherein to place the seat of Government. 

2. Another silly objection urged by some, is that the time has 
not come for the removal. The present Capital failato subserve 
the present wants of the Government, and is destined to be ren- 
dered "less and less acceptable by the march of events," and its 
removal to some more central and appropriate place cannot in the 
least adversely affect the general good of the country, and there- 
fore the time has come for the removal. I dismiss this objection 
as one of no weight whatever. 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 37 

There still remains, Mr. President, to be considered in con- 
nection with the National Capital a conviction, with many, so 
absurd that it deserves only to be noticed that it may be ren- 
dered contemptible. I refer to the conviction that the presence 
of the Capital at any place tends to demoralize the people and 
exercise an injurious influence upon the public interests where it 
may be. I am aware, Mr. President, that you believe in this 
absurdity. I have been informed that you so expressed yourself 
to your friends in this city during your last visit, and said that 
if the Capital was moved here, you would sell your land and 
abandon the city as your future home. Now, Mr. President, 
you should not have made that remark, nor should you entertain 
such a view of the Capital of your country. You are the official 
head of the American nation, and it becomes you to bear aloft 
the American name and the American character. It is unpatri- 
otic, unstatesmaniike, to entertain such a view of the Capital of 
your country. I am aware that Washington City has given a 
bad experience, but I have shown you why. I have shown you 
that it was not the distinctive presence of the Capital that has 
given the bad experience to Washington, but the unfortunate 
relation of the representative power of the nation with the non- 
representative interests and civilization of the people. The 
mechanic, the merchant, the banker, the landlord, the laborer, 
and all are dependent upon Government patronage for subsist- 
ence ; and no dependent people can live above demoralization. 
They will as surely generate vice and inefficiency as stagnant 
water generates malarious scum. The people of Washington 
City are chained to dependency ; and the nation sufi'ers by resting 
its arms on weakness. In fact, Mr. President, Washington City 
is unjustly dealt with by the United States Government by the 
control exercised over the people of that city. Under the policy 
of reconstruction, all have heard much about republican forms 
of government for the revolted States, and yet the District of 
Coluipbia, with a population greater than is contained by several 
of the States represented in Congress, has no political voice in 
the national councils. In this there is manifestly a wrong. The 
degradation of the people also carries with it the degradation of 
the national legislature. Congress is nothing but a national 



38 THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 

committee on streets and alleys for Washington City — an official 
capacity degrading to the official body it is. The removal of the 
Capital would benefit Washington and exalt the nation. It would 
place the people of the District of Columbia upon their own 
resources, and develop their smothered energies. It would give 
to the nation a new manifestation of life, consummate our 
national transition, and herald the inauguration of the New 
Republic. 

The new Capital must be adjacent to one of our great metro- 
politan cities, where the people of the city will be as independent 
in their industry and interests as the Government itself. Then 
the relationship of the two independents will serve a common 
and benign influence for the Avelfare of both. The strong and 
representative elements and interests of civilization will unite, at 
the home of the Government, with the legislative and represen- 
tative interests of the people for the common benefit of the 
entire nation. Then will experience reverse the conviction which 
you entertain, Mr. President, that the presence of the Capital 
would be injurious to any locality. Your position in this matter 
argues that the Capital should be abolished and the Government 
dissolved. Such should be the case if the Capital is a great 
national Pandora box. But, Mr. President, before it is estab- 
lished as a fact that the Capital of this country (for I think the 
people of no other nation argue it) will demoralize any locality 
where it may be placed, the people ought to test the validity of 
the charge with four years of experience with a President, a 
Cabinet, and a Congress, composed of meu of a high type of 
intellectual statesmen, of pure morality, and an exemplary life- 
practice. You know, Mr. President, there is much in habit, 
much in the character of men, that aftects society for good or 
evil. And, Oh, what a god-send to this nation it would be, if it 
could only be ruled and its laws made by the best and highest 
type of men. You must know how benign and elevating the 
influence of such men would be ! You know " in that gi-eat argu- 
ment which gave us the two most consummate orations of anti- 
quity, the question was, whether Athens should grant Demosthe- 
nes a crown. He had fled from battle, and his counsels, though 
heroic, brought the city to ruin. His speech is the masterpiece 



THE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLE. 39 

of all eloquence. Of the accusation by ^schines, it is praise 
enough to say that it stands only second to that. In it ^schines 
warns the Athenians that in granting crowns they judged them- 
selves, and were forming the character of their children." Hear 
his eloquent words : "Most of all, fellow-citizens, if your sons 
ask whose example they shall imitate, what will you say ? For 
you know well it is not music, nor the gymnasium, nor the 
schools, that mold young men, it is much more the public procla- 
mations, the public example If you take one whose life has no 
high purpose, everybody who sees it is corrupted. Beware, 
therefore, Athenians, remembering posterity will rejudge your 
judgment, and that the character of a city is determined by the 
character of the men it crowns." Mr. President, the people of 
this nation ought to heed the lesson of ^schines and teach it in 
the capital of their country. 

X. Immediate Removal Demanded. 

Mr. President, having passed over the field of discussion and 
presented to your mind an array of facts and arguments that are 
positively incontestable by any man, and can only be ignored by 
a stolid stupidity at variance with the genius of our national 
progress and continental greatness, I now insist that the imme- 
diate removal of the National Capital is demanded ; the facts, as 
well as the enlightened judgment of the American people, decide 
that Washington is unfit to be the national metropolis of our 
Government ; and the universal conviction that the removal of the 
Capital is only a question of time, coupled with the fact that its 
present removal would not, in any possible way, adversely afi"ect 
the general interest of the Government, but rather give it new 
life, argues incontrovertibly the wisdom of taking immediate 
steps for the removal to the grand Valley of the Mississippi. 

Every day of delay, Mr. President, in taking positive initia- 
tory steps for the removal, so much the more stints the Republic, 
retards the great mission of our people in their peaceful conquest 
of the Continent, and the complete organization of the Govern- 
ment into an imperial Republic of States. The mission of our 
people is sublime. Why stand ye in the way ? Why not move 



40 TBE NATIONAL CAPITAL MOVABLB. 

with our progress ? Let us celebrate our hundredth anniversary 
with a new Capital, and the inauguration of the New Republic, 
whose all-embracing rule shall be the new liberty which this 
nation has given to mankind. Let us go forward in our conti- 
nental mission, carrying out the designs of Columbus and 
Humboldt, apostolic citizens of our destiny. Let us rise above 
everything sectional, personal, or local, and move forward in our 
national purpose to the peaceful conquest of the continent. Let 
us bind it with iron bands from ocean to ocean, and from the 
Lakes to the Gulf. Let us traverse it by steam to every part of 
its wide domain, and hasten the time when in every quarter it 
will be jeweled with flourishing towns and cities and the land 
everywhere be made to bloom by the industry of our people. 

Let us raise ourselves up ; let us rise to the grandeur of the 
conception of one vast continental Republic, yielding to one 
beneficent law, and which shall be adorned with its crowning 
honor — a continental Capital worthy the nation, the symbol of 
whose power it is — great in its character of the nation whose 
design it accomplishes — fixed in the center of the States — over- 
looking the nation — the nation itself the sovereign of its power, 
and the Capital a part of the nation — with peerless dome reach- 
ing the heavens, and around whose earthly splendor ages will 
revolve in obedience to eternity's command, and in unison with 
the revolutions of majesterial States, around one central moving 
heart. Most respectfully, 

L. U. REAVIS. 

St, Louis, Mo,, January 1, 1871. 



REMOVING THE CAPITAL. 



[From the New York Tribune, January SS, IS?!.] 

We to-day accord a full hearing to those who seek a transfer 
of the Federal metropolis from the banks of the Potomac to 
those of the Mississippi. Mr. L. U. Reavis, who thus addresses 
President Grant on the subject, was an early and has been not 
only an earnest but an indefatigable champion of removal. He 
has worked more, and we judge to better purpose, than any of 
his allies ; and the considerations which favor removal have 
never been more fully nor more cogently set forth than they are 
in the letter herewith published. 

Yet we think the President is substantially if not technically 
right in his position that the Capital is not to be removed by a 
mere majority vote in each House — a majority which may num- 
ber less than one-third of the members entitled to sit in that 
House. The Capital of a great nation is not to be mounted on 
wheels and dragged hither and thither as a casual majority may 
dictate. We do not dispute the legal efficacy of such a vote ; we 
only maintain that removal is so grave a topic that, though the 
Constitution does not expressly prescribe it, something very like 
a Constitutional amendment should be required to effect it 
And this is what the President intended by his casual remarks 
quoted by Mr. Reavis. 

On the next point we are in full accord with Mr. Reavis. 
The Capital question should be fully considered and finally 
settled now. The westward and southward extension of our 
area, until it has become many times what it was in 1787, raises 
a fair presumption that the Capital needs to be re-located. The 
fact (if fact it be) that the Valley of the Potomac proffered the 
fittest site in 1800, by no means proves that it remains such to 



42 REMOVING THE CAPITAL. 

this daj. The fair inference is otherwise. Hence we say, let 
us take up the subject and dispose of it conclusively — that is, 
for so long as our country shall remain essentially what it is. 
If we shall go on annexing until we rule the entire continent, it 
is probable that New Orleans, or Vera Cruz, or Nicaragua, or 
Panama, will then be the spot for our Capital. But, having 
quadrupled our original area by additions on two sides only, and 
there paused, let us determine whether Washington shall or shall 
not remain the Mecca of our office-seeking pilgrims, before we 
spend another mill in buying costly grounds and erecting build- 
ings at Washington, which could not be sold for five per cent, of 
their cost in case the Government shall ever leave them behind it. 

But we are not convinced that a central location is so important 
as Mr. Reavis esteems it. Other things being quite equal, such 
location is expedient ; but other things rarely or never are equal. 
So London is the Capital of Great Britain, Paris of France, Stock- 
holm of Sweden, and Lisbon of Portugal, though neither of them 
is in the center of the kingdom. Nay, St. Petersburg, the mod- 
ern Capital of Russia, is by no means so central as was that 
Moscow which Peter the Great abandoned. Rome is not so near 
the center of Italy as Florence is ; yet the latter is about to 
give place to the former. China is a very old, conservative 
country ; yet Peking, her modern capital, is not so central to her 
territory as her earlier capitals were. In short, we concede to 
geographical position a very subordinate importance in the loca- 
tion of a seat of government. Mr. Reavis may wisely consider 
that his own St. Louis is not so near the center of our present 
domain as Topeka or Fort Riley, and govern himself accordingly. 

We have not a doubt that New York is the most desirable point 
in the Union for the location of its Capital. Nine-tenths of our 
-own people whose duties constrain them to reside or sojourn at the 
•Capital, with ten-tenths of the old world's embassadors and other 
visitants, would decidedly prefer it. Art, literature, the drama, 
music, and everything that interests or delights mankind, are 
more abundantly and cheaply enjoyed here than elsewhere in the 
new world. Moreover, our politics and municipal rule are so 
thoroughly rotten that even the presence of Congress and the 
Federal departments could not further corrupt them. 



REMOVING THE CAPITAL. 



4S 



Yet we do not ask nor seek a removal of the Capital to our 
city. We are quite content with Washington, though we are con- 
fident that one hundi-ed million dollars would have been saved 
ere this by a location which afforded the denizens of the Federal 
metropolis somewhat to live on besides the Government. That 
the present location was a very grave mistake, we have long 
been convinced ; and we are not sure that the blunder is beyond 
remedy. But read Mr. Reavis on this point, and form your own 
opinions.