Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1839-02-21

uO SoHiS WIN uldy duluh tulS W u0 pue,
and yet object that the advantages which
! anticipate from the measure would be
purchased, on The part. Of the old States,
al TOO great sacrifice. ltwould be pre-
mature to undertake to answer this OBJ jec-
tion before it is ascertained what portion
of the proceeds should he left to the States,
and what paid over to the Government;
and this cannot be done till after labori-
Gus invest cation, as has been stated. All
] maintain at present is, that the portion
allotted to the States should be not only
just and liberal, but such as would inter-
est them in preserving the arrangement
Thus far it would be obviously the interests
Of both parties, as has been shown In
the meantime, have suggested an equal
division of the proceeds, under The belief
that it would he satisfactory TO The new
States, and probably not far from the di-
vision which rigid investigation would
establish.
But of one thing / feel assured, that,
when the subject is fully examined. 1t will
be ascertained that an apporlionment OF
the proceeds may he fixed on, which will
give to the Government, sum per acre as
large, or not much less, OIL all the lands
which might thereafter be disposed of,
as it has received for what has been dis.
posed ofsince the present price was liked,
and which would leave, al the same time,
10 the States liberal and satisfactory al
lowance. If this should prove 10 he the
fact, the interest of all parties, even in a
pecuniarv point of view, would be recon-
ciled. Blu, that would be taking TOO mar
row a view of this important subject. 10
determine correctly the true interest OF the
parties in this arrangement. we must raise
our eyes above pecuniary considerations
to the far more interesting view-the po-
litical bearing of The measure. Thus view
ed. the gain TO both, and TO The whole
Union. would be iucalculabe. The new
States would gain the ownership and adj
minis,ration ofiheir whole domain-a gain
not more essential to their own indeper-
dence than to the convenience OF their cltI-
zens, who would thereby have their claims,
connected with the public lands, adjus ed
by their own Legislature, instead of being
dragged TO great distance from home to
await the tardy and uncertain action OF
Congress. But their greatest gain would
be, elevated 10 an equality with the other
States in all respects, and exempted from
the controlling influence of the Govern
ment, arising from widely expanded sys-
tenn of land offices.
To the Union the gain would not be
less important. Congress " ould be reliev-
ed from an immense and increasing mass
of business, which now consumes at least
one third Of its time, and be left free to
turn its attention to other subjects of deep
interest, which it is now compelled to neg
lect. The sessions would be greatly short
ened-a matter of importance, hot only
in pecuniary, bu, still more in a polili-
cal point of view. But these. though i'm
portant, arc but minor advantages. There
are others immeasurably greater. ltwould
close our land offices in the new States,
and. with them, the door to the vast pa
trouage and influence whi-h they place in
the hands of the Executive. Who can
estimate this advantage! Who is there,
that has particle Of patriotism or love OF
Republican institutions, who would moi
rejoice at the reduction Of such immense
patronage, made not only without injur!
Abut with advantage to the public! When
we, add TO this that, it would remove all
causes of conflict betweenihe new and old
Staies,s that it would Withdraw from the
Presidential contes, the public lands. thai
prolific source Of corruption in the hands
of the prolisate; and finally, that it would
save our vast and noble domain itself from
being squandeied in the struggle, it is hard
ly in the power of calculation to estimate
the advantages that would result.
Having now suggested what believe to
be the proper policy, 10 he pursued in re-
lation to the public lands within the new
States, and haslilyaraced the advantages of
the measure | hayssusges'ed for consider
alton, the next qnestion is, nave we the
right to dispose oEthe public lands in the
manner proposed2, Iwould not have sup
posed that there Could have been doubt
on this poinfsshad nor the Senator from
lr. Webster] raised it on
this, as well asoha former occasion. The
constitution gives 70. Congress, expressly.
the right to public lai,ds; and why may
they not dispose ofihem to the States as
well as to individuals? Mean see no reason,
and never have heard Que assigned. We
are in he daily habit of 3fnakins grants to
the States for public PURPOSES, aud if we
may grant, may not wesaiso sell or dispose
of them, as have pFbppsed! The lands
belong 10 the States, lin their confederate
character, as has been 1stated; aud Congress
is the trustee to dispose ofs,hem for the
common benefit. Theyare bound, in the
fulflment Of their trust, tod,spose of them
to the best advantage; and ifibe disposition
proposed be the best for all concerned,
Congress has not only the righl, 10 make
it, but would be bound by the trust so 10 do.