Liberty advocate. [volume] (Liberty, Miss.) 1835-1866, 1839-02-28

CollHlol property or luuu, DCIOH5 nv " Wv
States Of the Union in their conlederated, and
not in their individual character They we're
acquired either by purchase, out OF common
funds belonging to the Union, or by cesslon
from the States to the Union, to be hcld as a
fund in common; and am at loss to CONCEIVE
what right we have TO make that which belongs
TO the whole Union as a cGnmon fund, the sep
arate fund ofeach State. 1t seems to me that
it cannot be done without a manifest breach OF
trust and violation Of the Constitution. ms
is no new opinion, formed for the occasion. IT.
was, on the contrary, formed when Its author
FIRST introduced the measure, and when he and
Selfthoughl alike as to the necessity OF re-
lieving the Treasury Gifts surplus, in order to
avoid the difficulties and the dangers which
have since followed. Believing, then, that III
would be cfectual for that purpose, and more
easily adopted than any other, ! examined 1t
with an inclination to embraced as a Temporal
ry measure Of relief against pressing evil i
but it was impossible for Ye to bring my mind
to assent TO the right OF all pilng II.
But suppose this difficulty surmounted, there
are others, which regard as insurmountabIe.
Among them the fiscal objection is very lorml-
liable. The revenue from the lands cannot be-
sed by the measure, would necessarily throw
the whole expenses Of the Government on a
single source-the dWieS on imp0riS--and which
must be followed by their increase. This
would neither be fair, nor equal; and to which
|, representing in part, portion OF the Union,
on which the increased burden would mainly
fall, cannot assent.
But as formidable as is this, there are others
far more So 1t would not meet, or avert the
approaching danger. 1t would still leave the
public lands in the new States, under the oper-
alton Of the present system, and the subject oil
violent conflict between them and the old States,
with all the calamitous consequences to which
II have adver.ed. Instead Of preventing the
danger, it would, in fact, hasten and aggrayatc
lit. 1t may be laid down as a maxim, that no
measure can avert it, which is not adopted with
the appreciation and consent of the new States;
for the simple reason, that they must soon be-
come the predominant power; when that which
was established against their consent woulI be
Icorainly oyerthrown. Such would be the case
with the measure under consideration. If a.
Idopted, it must not only be without the consent
Iof those States, bat with their strenuous oppo-
Isition, of which we have had the most co?cIu-
slve evidence on the present occasion. When
moved by its author, as an amendment to tins
bill, 1t was violently opposed at the threshold
from that quarter, and received but single Vote
from the new States. 1t is not necessary to IN
Iquire whether this opposition on their part Is
reasonable, or not; whether 1t is the result OF
mere prejudice, or Of deliberate conviction that
| it is hostile to their interests. The fact itself,
that there isan almost universal and detcrmn-
ed resistance to the measure on their part,
| right or wrong, is, of itself, sufficient proof
that it cannot be relied on to avert the threat
ening danger. On the contrary, It's necessary
effect must be to accelerate and aggravatc IT.
Its adoption would, at once, bring the old and
new States into violent conflict, IN which the
former would be arrayed, almost to man, IL
determined effort to overthrow the arrange
mcnt, or some more hostile measure. Add tt
this that the Presidential contest would not TAI
to run into the controversy, and thus rcdoubI(
the excitement and animoSlty, with all the ia
tai consequences which | have shown mus
follow from blending the two.
Assuming, then, that the scheme is both Oh
Iieclionabe and inefficient, the question again oc
ours, what ought to be done? My mind l.
made up, after the most serious and deliberate
reflection, that there is, and can be, but one
remedy: TO cede-no that is not the proper
the constitutional word-to dispose OF the pub
lic lands to the States within the limits of which
they respectively lie, on such terms and under
such conditions as shall, at the same time, be
lust and liberal to the new States and sale to the
old. We must, in a word, part Nth the 0Cner
ship and administration Of The lands lying acttbt1
the States, leaving those in the Territories, anC
beyond, under the operation Of the present sys
tenn. The erH lies in ownership and admiaiS
= Itration, and aOitL0m parting UiM them no Permd
nent or egect@aI remedy can be applied,
But what shall be the terms-what portion
i Of the proceeds of the sales of those lands shall
be left to the Safes, to remunerate them fol
' the expense, trouble, and responsibility OF thel
administration, and what portion shall be paIt
=. over to the Government annually as a compen
!, sation for the land? | am not prepared TO an
swer this question. Its decision must depend
|, on q careful and minute examination OF all the
v facts and circumstances Of the case. But an
. decidedly Of the opinion that the portion to be
!. left to the new States ought not only TO be am
y pie to cover the trouble, expense, and response
+ bilty Of management, but very considerable.
4 beyond, so as to unite their interests with ours
in order to give stability to the arrangement
+ and insure care and fidelity in the management
J.. Resting my estimate Of the compensation OF
L. these principles, have supposed that the new
I States might pay over annually one-half of The
+ gross proceeds of sales to the Government, an,
N have an ample sum left for their compensation
!. But this is a mere estimate, without suficien