Being strongly importuned from a variety of sources, Mr. Clay consented to become a candidate for the senatorship again, and was reëlected. Immediately after the convening of congress, he once more brought forward his land bill. After being read twice, it was referred to the appropriate committee, at the head of which was Mr. Walker, of Mississippi, who said, that he had been instructed by it to move the indefinite postponement of the bill, whenever it should come up for consideration. A few days after, he introduced his own bill, proposing to restrict the sales of lands to actual settlers. On the ninth of February, 1837, Mr. Calhoun introduced _his_ bill, which ostensibly sold, but in reality gave to the new states, the public lands. This plan was vigorously denounced by Mr. Clay, who expressed himself opposed to all schemes of disposing of the national domain which would deprive the old states of their rightful interest in it, and that, while he had strength to stand and speak, he would employ it in protesting against their adoption. He implored the senate not to appeal to the cupidity of the new states from party inducements, and exhorted a faithful adhesion to equity and justice in apportioning the public lands. On a bill, originating with the committee on finance, which contained provisions conflicting with the compromise act, Mr. Clay spoke at considerable length; also on a resolution introduced by Mr. Ewing, rescinding the specie circular, which required all payments for public lands to be in specie. On the sixteenth of January, Mr. Clay discussed the question of _expunging_ from the records of the senate, for 1834, his resolution censuring general Jackson for removing the deposits unconstitutionally; Mr. Benton having introduced a resolution requiring its erasure. In his speech, Mr. Clay so blended indignant invective, sarcasm, scorn, humor, and argument, as to make it one of the most withering rebukes ever administered. ‘What patriotic purpose,’ said he, ‘is to be accomplished by this expunging resolution? Can you make that not to be, which has been? Can you eradicate from memory, and from history, the fact, that in March, 1834, a majority of the senate of the United States passed the resolution which excites your enmity? Is it your vain and wicked object to arrogate to yourself that power of annihilating the past, which has been denied to omnipotence itself? Do you intend to thrust your hands into our hearts, and to pluck out the deeply rooted convictions which are there? Or is it your design merely to stigmatize us? You cannot stigmatize us. ‘Ne’er yet did base dishonor blur our name.’