The Arkansas advocate., 1833-12-04
&s~sNN

1 and the Legislative of tho Territory was appointed the agent of the granter, to select, sell, and convey the land so granted. Ky the terms Of the grant, every doilar received Iby the agent belongs as completely to the 1 1 Territory of Arkansas, as # t had been raised by direct tax upon the property of Itke Territory. The fact of it's being do-
 nation, does not change the property ef the
 Territory, II the slightest degree. II was
 expressly designed to sage the people from tbeine taxed, that ti4e efafit ~ts made. fie title to the fund being completely vested ill Ithe Territory under the act, the question lthen arose, who had the right to apply the fund, to the object contemplated by the act Who are the agents of the grantor, to op- propriate the fund after 1t becomes the pro- iperfy of the Territory !
 By our organic law t Is provided, that
 the General Assembly shall have power to
 make laws in all cases, both civil and crimi- nal, for the good government of the people of (this) Territory, not repugnant to, or in-
 consistent with, the Constitution and iawsof the United States. Under this lfw, the General Assembly of Arkansas possessed
 the vhele Legislative power of the Terri
 tory of Arkansas. They alone possessed
 the power to point out the mode and man. her, in which the public funds, Whether
 given to the Territory, raised by taxation,
 or acquired in any other way.1 shall be ap-
 piled and to make the necessary appro- lpriation, to meet that application. 1t was therefore, as the General Assembly of Ar kansas, and as the law-niaizifig power, and
 not as the agent of the National Govern
 ment, that the power to apply the donation lof Congress to the building of House,
 was admitted by all 10 De vested in the Ge- Enefal Assembly, at thesession held in Get
 1881. The only question Is, what vas [ the power given to the Legislature over the
 grant ? 1t was 10 select and sell the land, :, land to convey the same. Is there one
 word ii the act of Congress, pointing out kY whom the building shall be constructed
 where it shall be in Little Boek-or what description of building 1t shall be and can either of those objects be lawfully accom- Epiished, without 8. law authorizing them ?-
 # these questions must be answered in the negative, then as the only power given to, ] the Governor by the act Of 1882, was the agency power gwen to the Legislature by } the act of 1881, ,and as the act of 1892 ex- . pressiy admits, that the ten sections of land i had been previously granted to the Terri
 tory, 1t IS clear that the funds in the hands Of the Governor belong to the Territory of
 Arkansas. and that he IS accountable for , the same, 10 the General Assembly, and to the Territory, precisely in the same manner as would be any other agent, having n his
 hands the money of the people. Would Ii
 hHe been competent for Congress, without diyestng the Territory of its title to the ten /. sections, to have interfered with the fund, ], after it became tKe property q the Territo- ,, Try! This question Is answered by referring l to the thousand acre grant. In that case, - Congress divested the Territory of it's fife ,- yefnof, in trust fur the benefit of the Terri
 Tory. Ey thts means, the Governor was
 authorized to appiy inc fund, arising from ]. Fthe safe of the one thousand acres, to the y erection of q Court House and jail, and ;. was authorized 10 save the Territory the i. expense of purchasing site for State s House, Court-House and Jail, by laying off : three squares of the land granted to him, :. and Yestng the title in that event, to those . squares, i'll the Territory.
 !, The case put by way of illustration, in = the report of the select committee appoint
 ed to examine the public buildings, &c.
 shows eonclusWely the fallaeious reason- n ing on which that report rtisfounded. Suppose !. Congress had. given twenty-five thousand '. dollars as fund for erecting public build- V lngs, and had authorized the Legislature to : draw for, and receive the money, and dis-
 pose q | toy htet purpose; would there be i any doubt of the right to build or if they failed to execute, and their power was given i, to the Governor, that he would not have the power to build Here inc very point
 IS assumed which settles fife whole question: !. In this ease, in order to give the power to ei-
 ther the Legislature or the Goyernor,to build,
 as agents, an net of Congress airing that
 power specially, is necessary. But SUD- i. lpose that Congress was to give twenty-five 6 thousand dollars to the Territory, for the purpose of building house, and by the
 same act, authorize the Legislature of tho
 Territory 10 draw the money, but give ro
 authority 10 aay agent to build the house, and that the Legislature failed to draw the [ money, and that the power given 1t at the
 tune the gift was made, Is subsequently
 vested in the Governor; would, we would ask, the Governor have a. right to build the : house, without being authorized by law, either of Congress, or the General Assem- by of tfe Territory, to whom the gift was made, to do SO? If Congress had directed ;, who should by out the money. an aoent or