cert of action between the State legislatures, and among their delegates in Congress, if indeed further evidence were necessary than the journals of Congress for that period, it is a very remarkable fact, worthy never to have been lost sight of, that each State made its cession to the United States upon the same identical conditions, though not always expressed in the precise same words.

The State of NEW YORK led the way in this great federal or national object, with her deed of cession consummated by her delegates in Congress, on the 1st of March, 1781, under the authority conferred on them by an act of the legislature of the State, passed at Albany the year before, entitled "an act to facilitate the completion of the articles of confederation and perpetual union among the United States of America." The following is an extract from the said act, which was in effect repeated in the instrument of cession by their delegates, viz:

"And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, That the territory which may be ceded or relinquished by virtue of this act, either with respect to the jurisdiction, as well as the right of pre-emption of soil, or the right of pre-emption of soil only, shall be and inure for the use and benefit of such of the United States as shall become members of the federal alliance of the said States, AND FOR NO OTHER USE OR PURPOSE WHAT'SOEVER."

The next cession of territory was made by the VIRGINIA delegation in Congress, on the 1st of March, 1784, under the authority of an act of the legislature of the State passed the year before, empowering them to convey to the United States in Congress assembled, all the right of that Commonwealth to the territory northwest of the river Ohio. The following is an extract from the deed of cession so authorized and ratified-showing the conditions annexed, viz:

(

"That all the lands within the territory so ceded to the United States, and not reserved for, or appropriated to, any of the before mentioned purposes, or disposed of in bounties to the officers and soldiers of the American ariny, shall be considered as a COMMON FUND for the use and benefit of such of the United States as have become, or shall become, members of the confederation or federal alliance of the said States, Virginia inclusive, according to their usual respective proportions in the general charge and expenditure, and shall be 'faithfully and bona fide disposed of for that purpose, AND FOR NO OTHER USE OR PURPOSE WHATSOEVER."

After Virginia, the State of MASSACHUSETTS, through her delegates in Congress, commissioned and empowered by certain acts of the Legislature of the said State, exccuted a deed of cession of her lands to the United States, on the 19th April, 1785, from which the following extract shows the like conditions with the above, viz: "Now therefore know ye, That we, in the name, and for and on behalf of the said Commonwealth of Massachusetts, do, by these presents, assign, transfer, quit-claim, cede, and convey, to the United 'States of America, for their benefit, Massachusetts inclusive, all right, title, and estate, of and in as well the soil as the jurisdiction, which the said Commonwealth hath to the territory or tract within the limits of the Massachusetts charter, situate and lying west of the following line, that is to say," &c. The cession of Massachusetts and that of New York, were located on lake Ontario, the Niagara river, and lake Erie, including the TRIANGLE" lying on lake Erie, west of New York, and north of Pennsylvania, since sold by the United States to Pennsylvania. Though MAINE was a part of Massachusetts, that territory was not then ceded.

CONNECTICUT, shortly after the cession by Massachusetts, that is on the 14th September, 1786, through her delegates in Congress, also empowered by an act of the State legislature, executed a deed of cession of her western lands, "beginning at the completion of the forty-first degree of north latitude, one hundred and twenty miles west of the western boundary line of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as now claimed by that Commonwealth, and from thence to a line drawn north, parallel to, and one hundred and twenty miles west of the said west line of Pennsylvania, and to continue north until it comes to forty-two degrees and two minutes north latitude," as embraced in her colonial charter; but reserving in her cession to the United States, the lands known familiarly as the "Western Reserve" over which the territorial jurisdiction was afterwards relinquished to the United States. The conditions of er cession were in nearly the same words of that of Massachusetts.

SOUTH CAROLINA, on the 8th of March, 1787, passed "an act to authorize the delegates of the State, in Congress, to convey to the United States in Congress assembled, all the right of the said State to the territory therein described." Accordingly her delegates in Congress made a deed of cession, on the 9th of August of that year, of all her claim to lands, which, according to the description given in the said act would be found between the claims of North Carolina and Georgia, and between the Mississippi river and South Carolina. The conditions of her cession were also, " for the benefit of the United States, South Carolina inclusive."

NORTH CAROLINA, on the day of December, 1789, passed "an act for the purpose of ceding to the United States of America certain western lands therein described." In pursuance of the authority of said act, her Senators in Congress made a deed of cession, on the 25th February, 1790, of all her claim and title to the lands lying beyond the Alleghany mountains, and bounded west by the Mississippi, between the degrees of 35 and 36 50 north latitude-constituting what now forms the State of Tennessee, a portion of which was subject to a variety of claims described in the act authorizing the cession, with the special reservation of those rights so recog

nized. The said act authorizing this cession contained, among others, the following conditions and limitations, viz:

"That all the lands intended to be ceded by virtue of this act to the United States of America, and not ' appropriated as before mentioned, shall be considered as a common fund for the use and benefit of the United 'States of America, North Carolina inclusive, according to their respective and usual proportion in the general 'charge and expenditure, and shall be faithfully disposed of for that use and purpose, AND FOR NO OTHER USE

The State of GEORGIA, whose western territory was the next in extent and value to that of Virginia, did not make her cession of it to the United States until 1802. This territory reached from the limits proper of the State, to the Mississippi river, and included nearly the whole of the present States of Alabama and Mississippi. Among the conditions of her cession, the Indian titles to lands within the limits of the State (known as the Creek settlements) were to be extinguished at the expense of the United States, and she was to receive $1,250,000 out of the proceeds of the first sales of the lands in her ceded territory. Another stipulation was, "That all the lands ceded by this agreement to the United States shall, after satisfying the above mentioned payment of $1,250,000 to the State of Georgia, and the grants recognised by the preceding conditions, be considered as a common fund for the use and benefit of the United States, Georgia included, and shall be faithfully disposed of for that use and purpose, AND FOR NO OTHER USE AND PURPOSE WHATEVER." (76)

(76) It may be curious here to remark, that the General Land Office, in making a statement of the lands ceded by certain States to the United States, in answer to a call by Mr. Senator WRIGHT, of New York, in 1840, was not enabled, by the deeds of cession from the States of New York, Virginia, Massachusetts, and Connecticut, to designate the lines that separated their respective cessions; but was obliged to be content with embracing the entire area of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, as composing the aggregate of their several cessions; from which this plain inference may be drawn, that but for the United States having become the sole owner, (except in regard to Indian possessions therein contained, with the Virginia and Connecticut reservations,) there would have been contested limits between those four States—such was the state of inaccuracy in the day of colonial charters and grants of land from the Crown, on the basis of which these cessions were subsequently made by the States to the United States. In like manner there would have been disputed claims between North Carolina and South Carolina, on the limits between Tennessee and Mississippi, and between South Carolina and Georgia, on the same limits, "as it has been ascertained since their deeds of cession, [says the aforesaid statement,] that the claims of North Carolina and Georgia bounded on each other by the line between Tennessee and Mississippi, so as to exclude any claim by South Carolina to cede to the United States." It may also be not inappropriate to mention here, that notwithstanding the explicit conditions and restrictions by which the lands of the States were ceded to the United States, to constitute a joint fund for the benefit of all the States, in proportion to their respective political or fiscal relations-yet the enormous amount of 16,795,192 acres has already been given by the United States (out of this trust fund) to the new States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Michigan, Arkansas, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Florida, for internal improvements, seats of government, colleges, and seminaries, and reservations for common schools, whilst nothing of the kind has been done for any of the old States, not even those who made these patriotic donations to "encourage and render perpetual, the Federal Alliance;" nay, no more than if it had been as explicitly interdicted in the deeds of cession.

The following Table shows the GRANTS made to the several new States and Territories for Internal Improvements, Salines, Public Buildings, and Seats of Government, Colleges, and Seminaries, and the amount reserved for Public Schools-in which munificence the old States enjoy no participation whatever, except to have their population tempted away by emigration to enjoy it in the favored

States.

Besides this partial distribution of the munificence of the United States among the new States to the exclusion of the OLD THIRTEEN, there has resulted from certain acts of Congress regulating the settlement of new territories preparatory to their introduction, as new States, into the Union, a still greater injury to the entire southern section or slave holding portion of the Confederacy, who were the principal donors-especially Virginia-of those lands to the United States, viz: an impediment (perhaps unintentionally) placed in the way of the FREEDOM OF EMIGRATION to settle those lands-amounting to an exclusion of their citizens altogether by excluding their slave property, and an appropriation of the whole public domain affected by those regulations to the citizens of another section; whereby not only is the constitutional right of property invaded, and the political complexion of the new States prospectively moulded so as to comport with the sectional feeling of a temporary majority of Congress, but the future permanency of the rights of property within their own original plantations and domicils, endangered; and more, the stability of the Union itself is threatened, by the progressive interference of this ill-fostered, increasing, malign hostility, daily expanding under those unconstitutional impediments, and virtual exclusions from the very territory which their fathers had given to the Confederacy for their "COMMON BENEFIT."

But there has been some redeeming virtue in the occasional stay and check opposed to the onward progress of this injustice.

THE INDIAN TRIBES within the limits of the United States, are considered, in some degree, as independent communities-exercising by toleration some of the rights of sovereignty of which they were deprived by conquest. Among which, they are admitted (in a limited sense) to be the rightful occupants of their soil; and they have been permitted (also in a qualified sense) to prescribe the rules for the government of their

communities.

But their sovereignty being incomplete, their power to dispose of their land at their own will, is restricted to the United States, as the paramount sovereign authority-qualified with the exclusive right of PRE-EMPTION, or rather the absolute right of PURCHASE, exclusive of all others, whether individuals, states, or tribes, to be sold or otherwise disposed of as other public lands acquired in the modes before recited. (See act 26th March, 1804, section 15.)

In pursuance of these views it would seem perfectly feasible, that our treaties with Indian tribes might be made to conform to certain fixed, uniform, fundamental principles applicable to all, as one assimilated system of Indian relations, whereby to avoid the existing complication of United States agency in the disposition of Indian reservations on Indian account, &c. ; in regard to which the Chickasaw treaty is a peculiar instance of departure from the general rule of treating with Indian tribes, giving the government a greater complexity of official details to execute, than some dozen other tribes put together as I have shown in chapter I, speaking of the anomaly of the Chickasaw treaty-not to say that most of the rest have too many peculiarities to be consistent with the demands of system, in the adjustment of which it would seem quite appropriate that the Commissioner of the Land Office should be consulted, particularly in regard to the cessions of Indian lands to the United States.

·

Though the 6th article of the "ordinance for the government of the territories of the United States northwest of the river Ohio," passed the 13th of July, 1787, says, "there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes," &c.; yet, on the other hand, the 3d section of the act of the 7th April, 1798, authorizing the establishment of a government in the Mississippi territory, says, "the President of the United States is hereby authorized to establish therein [meaning in said territory] a government in all respects similar to that now existing, the last article [the 6th, above quoted] of the ordinance made for the government thereof, by the late Congress, on the 13th day of July, 1787, excepted," &c. Now it is obvious that this exclusion of the last article of the aforesaid ordinance, was made for good reasons, on principles of equity, and certainly ought to prevail in all future regulations for the establishment of new territorial governments. Upon the acquisition of the territories of Louisiana, this policy, or rather this constitutional justice, was adopted, perhaps under the necessity of the case, slave property then already existing to a great extent in those territories. Accordingly the 2d section of the act of the 31st October, 1803, entitled "an act to enable the President to take possession of the territories ceded by France to the United States," &c., provides, under certain limitations, "that all the military, civil, and judicial powers, exercised by the officers of the existing government of Louisiana, shall be vested, and exercised, in such manner, as the President shall direct, for maintaining and protecting the inhabitants of Louisiana in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion." But this was nothing more than the constitutional guaranty of protection to these three inseparable elements of all republican institutions, to which the framers of that sacred instrument gave its pledge. And why has the protection of property had assigned to it the middle seat of honor between "liberty" and "religion," except that it was more eminent than either of the others, as being emphatically the child of conciliation and compromise? Was it not in this very spirit that one of the wise men of the cast--he who is so justly celebrated for his advocacy of the constitution, said, on a recent occasion, that "no more than justice had been done him, in ascribing to him a steady adhesion to the union of the States upon the principles, and according to the provisions of the CONSTITUTION." That "he heartily rejoiced" to find "that we of the North and the South are still brethren in feeling and members of the same great political family, bound together by the articles of agreement in our glorious CONSTITUTION." That he must be a presumptuous man indeed, who would venture to think that he could suggest any new features of improvement, or in any way add to our present form of united government." "By its provisions' and compromises,' I stand, as I ever have stood, and ever will stand; and wo to the meddling politicians who would assail them, in the hope of getting surer and safer guaranties for State rights!" And yet, has not another, if not so wise, still a very influential man of the same east, declared it, in a popular harangue, to be their "boast that MAN is the great staple production of New England," to be sent, not merely in a large delegation to Chicago, in the advocacy of western improvements, but on all occasions to the great West-for such is the fair inference. Divested of its exclusiveness, this would be all right; for who would object, who could rationally object to any section of the Union boasting of their staple productions in the abstract. But, if disparaging comparisons, though ever so well founded, are very sore things, by how much the more so is the assumption of an exclusiveness of merit, particularly when it claims a preference over all others in that great staple, which, in its boon companion, was the very crowning production of the Divine architect. Other States can also justly boast of their staple production of the same kind. At least their political and civil rights entitle them to an equal participation in emigrating to, and locating the soil of our new territories, unrestrained in their constitutional rights and claims of protection and enjoyment of their property. Indeed, this is a matter of municipal regulation, left, by the "compromises" of the constitution, to the States themselves, and Congress has no constitutional power to interfere or "meddle" with it, in prescribing regulations for territorial governments, on whose "legislative councils" all control over these same municipal concerns devolve, in anticipation of their attaining to the maturity of formal admission as independent States and members of the Confederacy. A general emancipation, which is the alleged pretext for all this injustice, will no doubt be gradually consummated, in the course of God's will in the great work of meliorating the civil and political, the moral and religious condition of the human family, unaided by sectional monopolies of our new territories in violation of the "provisions and compromises" of the constitution, thus to impair and undermine the constitutional rights of the South, by indirection, by circumvention!! Let the thing be done fairly and above board, and the South will be found ready to do her part in this civil and political reform-or moral and religious regeneration, as many also view it—whenever it may be practicable; and she is even now doing, as she has already done, much in the process of gradual emancipa. tion, under the motto of " LAISSEZ NOUS FAIRE." What stronger practical evidence then, could be afforded to prove that we of the North and the South are still brethren in feeling and members of the same great political family, bound together by the articles of agree ment in our glorious constitution," than literally and rigidly to execute the conditions of all acquisitions of new territory for the common benefit of all the States? And yet, what short of this can be satisfactory evidence of such family fraternity of feeling and good fellowship according to the spirit of the "provisions and compromises of the constitution?" Upon these principles a great arrear of public lands for internal improvement and school purposes, &c., would be due to the OLD THIRTEEN; and a considerable atonement, on another account, but never to be realized to the South.

Mr. Webster in answer to Judge Wayne at Savannah, while on his southern tour-May 26, 1847.

Hon. Josiah Quincy, Jr., presiding at a Boston meeting in advocacy of western improvements-Boston Daily Advertiser, June 12, 1847.

Strange to say, the freedom of access and location of our public lands, is more open to the convict emigrants of Europe, than to southern planters with their lawful property.

(Of the plan of Survey of the Public Domain.)

In the next place it is proper to take a cursory review of the general plan of the "Surveying Department, for the survey of the public lands, preparatory to the disposition of the same, whether by sale, grant, donation, or otherwise.

In order to impart at once a comprehensive idea of the operations of the Surveying Department, as conducted by the Surveyors General in their respective districts, their several offices and functions may be characterized as so many topographical bureaus of land engineering, under the direction and control nevertheless, of the Commissioner of the General Land Office, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the President, as the case may be the Surveyors General having the immediate control of their clerks and draughtsmen, and a large number of deputy surveyors, chain carriers, and axe men, distributed over the face of the various States and territories containing public lands.

There are eight Surveyors General, attached to a corresponding number of districts, viz: 1. Lucius Lyon, to the district northwest of the Ohio, embracing Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan, residence at Detroit. 2. Geo. W. Jones, district of Wisconsin and Iowa, residence Du Buque. 3. F. R. Conway, district of Illinois and Missouri, residence St. Louis. 4. Wm. Pelham, district of Arkansas, residence Little Rock. 5. C. A. Bradford, district of Mississippi, residence Jackson, Miss. 6. P. T. Landry, district of Louisiana, residence Donaldson. 7. James H. Weakly, district of Alabama, residence Florence. 8. Robert Butler, district of Florida, residence St. Augustine.

To comprehend the perplexities that have occasionally beset the Surveying Department, and in a great degree felt by the registers and receivers, and by the General Land Office itself, for the want of a uniform system of surveying, occasioned in a great measure by legislative departures from the original plan, I shall give here an abstract of the original plan, and the subsequent alterations, or innovations on it. The original plan of survey was as follows:

By the ordinance of Congress, passed on the 20th of May, 1785, "for ascertaining the mode of [surveying and] disposing of the public lands in the western territory," it was provided that-"a surveyor from each State shall be appointed by Congress or a committee of the States, who shall take oath, &c.: *** That the geographer under whose direction the surveyors shall act, shall occasionally form such regulations for their conduct. as he shall deem necessary, &c. *** The surveyors, as they are respectively qualified, shall proceed to 'divide the said territory into TOWNSHIPS of six miles square, by lines running due north and south, and others 'crossing these at right angles, as near as may be, unless where the boundaries of the late Indian purchases may render the same impracticable, and then they shall depart from this rule no farther than such particular circum'stances may require," &c. *** "The first line running north and south, as aforesaid, [extending to Lake Erie,] 'shall begin on the river Ohio, at a point that shall be found to be due north from the western termination of a line 'which has been run as the southern boundary of the State of Pennsylvania: and the first line running east and west, shall begin at the same point, and shall extend through the whole territory," &c. *** "The geographer 'shall designate the TOWNSHIPS or fractional parts of townships, by numbers, progressively, from south to north; 'always beginning each range with number 1; and the RANGES shall be distinguished by their progressive numbers to 'the westward-the first range, extending from the Ohio to Lake Erie, being marked number 1. The geographer shall personally attend to the running of the first east and west line; and shall take the latitude of the extremes of the first north and south line, and of the mouths of the principal rivers.

6

"The LINES shall be measured with a chain, shall be plainly marked by chaps on the trees, and exactly de'scribed on a plot, whereon shall be noted by the surveyor, at their proper distances, all mines, salt springs, salt 'licks, and mill seats, that shall come to his knowledge; and all water courses, mountains, and other remarkable and 'permanent things over or near which such lines shall pass, and also the quality of the soil.

6

"The PLOTS of the townships, respectively, shall be marked by sub-divisions into lots [or sections] of one 'mile square, or 640 acres, in the same direction as the external lines, and numbered from 1 to 36; always be'ginning the succeeding range of the lots [or sections] with the number next to that with which the preceding one concluded. And where, from the cause before mentioned, only a fractional part of a TOWNSHIP shall be 'surveyed, the lots protracted thereon shall bear the same numbers as if the township had been entire. And the surveyors, in running the external lines of the townships, shall, at the interval of every mile, mark corners for the lots which are adjacent, always designating the same in a different manner from those of the townships," Which ordinance was modified (in regard to surveys) in various unimportant respects, by the subsequent acts, of the 9th July, 1788, supplementary to the said ordinance; of the 18th May, 1796, providing for the sale of the lands of the United States northwest of the Ohio; of the 11th February, 1805, concerning the mode of surveying the public lands of the United States; and of the 6th May, 1812, for designating, surveying, and granting military bounty lands.

&c.

But the 1st section of the act of the 24th April, 1820, (repealing the credit system, and establishing the cash system,) introduced some modifications of preceding regulations in regard to the sub-divisions of lands thereafter to be offered at public and at private sale-which happened some years thereafter to involve a doubt, in one particular, as to the legality of a Secretary's instruction for executing the same, and the Attorney General's opinion

6

thereon being requested, (in connection with other matters,) he proceeded, on the 2d August, 1837, to give his opinion, commencing by a recital of the provision of the 1st section of said act, thus: "The first section of the act of the 24th April, 1820, provides that the public lands of the United States, when offered at PUBLIC SALE, 'shall be offered in half-quarter sections; that when offered at PRIVATE SALE, they may be purchased at the 'option of the purchaser, either in entire sections, half sections, quarter sections, or half-quarter sections: that in every case of the division of a quarter section, the line for such division shall run south and north, and the corners and contents of half-quarter sections be ascertained in the manner directed and prescribed in the act of the 11th February, 1805; and that the fractional sections containing one hundred and sixty acres or upwards, shall in like manner, as nearly as practicable, be sub-divided into half-quarter sections, under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury; but fractional sections containing less than one hundred and sixty acres shall not be divided, but shall be sold entire." Under this latter clause, (says the Attorney General,) the Secretary of the Treasury, on the 10th June, 1820, issued instructions directing that fractional 'sections containing MORE than one hundred and sixty acres should be divided into half-quarter sections, by 'north and south OR east and west lines, so as to preserve the most compact and convenient forms. The matter is then narrowed down (says the Attorney General) to the question whether the instruction of 1820, is a legal and valid exercise of the discretion committed to the Secretary of the Treasury [rather command to Surveyors 'General, by the law, to be executed under regulations that may be prescribed by the Secretary.] It will readily 'occur, that to authorize me (says the Attorney General) to pronounce an instruction of this nature, issued im'mediately after the enactment of the law, illegal, the objection should be a very clear one, &c., * which

is by no means the case in the present instance; and after mature consideration, I am led to answer the question 'just stated, in the affirmative," &c.

Pursuing this subject, the 1st section of the act of the 5th April, 1832, supplementary to the several laws for the sale of the public lands, extends the sub-divisions of lands to be thereafter offered at private sale, to quarter-quarter sections; and makes the course of the line dividing such quarter-quarter sections to run east and west, in order to preserve compactness of form. It says "that, from the 1st of May, (then ensuing,) all the public 'lands of the United States, when offered at PRIVATE SALE, may be purchased, at the option of the purchaser, either in entire sections, quarter sections, half-quarter sections, or quarter-quarter sections: and in every case ' of a division of a half-quarter section, the line for the division thereof shall run east and west, and the corners ' and contents of the quarter-quarter sections which may thereafter be sold, shall be ascertained as nearly as may 'be, in the manner and on the principle directed and prescribed by the 2d section of the act entitled 'an act con'cerning the mode of surveying the public lands of the United States,' passed on the 11th February, 1805; and 'the fractional sections containing FEWER or MORE than one hundred and sixty acres, shall in like manner, as 'nearly as may be practicable, be sub-divided into quarter-quarter sections, under such rules and regulations as 'may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury' with a provision not to alter any special provision made by law for the sale of land in town lots; and that no person shall be permitted to enter more than one half-quarter 'section of land in quarter-quarter sections; and in no case, unless he intends it for cultivation or for the use of his improvement; and that such entries shall not interfere with the right of pre-emption," &c., &c.

But a very radical change in the original PLAN OF SURVEY had been introduced by the act of the 24th of May, 1824, which will be best understood by the following extract from the Commissioner's instructions of the 31st August, 1824, to Surveyors General to execute the same as nearly as practicable. He says: "An act having passed on the 24th April, 1824, changing the mode of surveying the public lands on any river, lake, or watercourse, you are hereby authorized to depart from the ordinary mode of surveying lands adjoining lakes or water'courses, whenever in your opinion the situation of the lands, the accommodation of settlers, or the interest of the government, may make it expedient; and survey the same in conformity with the provisions of the act re'ferred to. It will in many instances be impossible to survey the lands in strict conformity to the provisions of this act, in respect to the prescribed front and depth, but there must be as near an approximation to the rule 'prescribed as the locations will permit.' "If the watercourses on which the surveys are to be made, ap

*

proach nearly to a straight line, through the whole extent of a section, then the lots could be laid off in strict 'conformity to the law; but in proportion as a watercourse deviates from a straight line, so will a greater or less ' number of lots to be laid off in a section or township, deviate from the precise form prescribed by the act. The ' extent of this deviation must necessarily depend on the judgment and tact of the deputy surveyors."

This is the entire act of the 24th May, 1824, above referred to, entitled "an act changing the mode of surveying the public lands, on any river, lake, bayou, or watercourse," viz: "BE IT ENACTED, &c. That whenever in the opinion of the President of the United States, a departure from the ordinary mode of surveying land on any river, lake, bayou, or watercourse, would promote the public interest, he may direct the Surveyor General in whose district such land is situated, and where the change is intended to be made, under such rules and regulations as the President may prescribe, to cause the lands thus situated to be surveyed in tracts of two acres in width, fronting on any river, bayou, lake, or watercourse, and running back the depth of forty acres: which 'tracts of land, so surveyed, shall be offered for sale entire, instead of in HALF-QUARTER SECTIONS, and in the usual manner, and on the same terms, in all respects, as the other public lands of the United States." A plot of