Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1839-02-04

in regard TO those lands acquired by purchase. a
word on each Of iheso heads.
1. We believe The constitutional objection 10 be
entirely caplious and unfounded The fund deriva-
bio from the sales of the public lands is entirely SUI
eeneus. II it were a tar upon the people, we
! should ourselves protest, against the monstrous poll
cy of first collecting, and then discussing 1t. as not
only grossly unjust and prepostcrous, but manifest
~ unconstitutional, since the taxing power conferred
upon Congress contemplated no such absurdity. But
this is a joint fund. Held in common, and for the
common bene6t-and II there be a surplus thrown
into the treasury. beyond its annual wants, the States
arc its lawful elaimants-and it seems TO us 10 be
especially over. f~astidious to refuse to receive II as e
quail distributes. when the only alternative is its
expenditure by the general government partially
and unequally, and as many believe and assert, up
on unconstitutional objects. But the truth IS, Tie
general government has recognised and acted upon
The policy OF distribution from its first foundaiion.
What, but Distribution, is the appropriation oil so
many millions of acres, and 50 much per cenium
upon The amount OF sales, given to the new States,
wear after year The only change which the
friends Of the administration policy ask, is, that
heneefolih this partial aud unjust system shall cease,
and that all the States shall stand upon an equal
footing If II be constitutional to distribute por-
lions OF the public lands 10 the new States, Why, IN
the name Of common sense, we ask, IS II unconstitu-
tional 10 dnliibute portions among the old States
also Do We not all live under the same system i!
Why. then. this discrimination Why this inc
quality in the appoitionlment of a common aud joint
fund.- We might extend the argument on this
head. but we have not room now TO do so.
OILY la pxpe1iepry. II ia alIeue1 that IL will
convert thu States into beneiieiaries of the general
government, and break down their Independence
We deny it. II the fund proposed to be distributed
belonged / 10 the general government, there might be
some force in the argument. But ii is not SO. The
general government IS only a trustee tot the admin
istration OF n julnt fund; and if, after d%eilasing tho
ordinary expenditures of an economical government,
such as ours should he, there be y surplus remain
ing, 1t belongs 10 the States, and in demanding ii,
they are mol s%uppliants asking boon, but creditors
claiming their rIghts. What is there, in this calcu-
lated TO impair their independence F! Are the part
ners in a firm, who employ an agent to conduct
their business, snpplidnts when they demand OF
that agent their respective dividends upon the sur
plus profits of their common capital! No and
no more are the States, who, similarly sltua-
ted, make the same demand upon the general
governmenl, Their agent for the management and
sale of the public lands. We are likewise told that
IT will, by Withdrawing annually large sums from the
public treasury, lead to an increase Of the t,riff, in
order to raise a revenue sufficient to meet the expen-
dI,ures. Not so. On the contrary it will make all
the States interested in enforcing economy in the
public expenditures, and rendering an increased Ia
riff unnecessary. IT, as some propose, however, the
,Y,,,u,, :. II, ....,- A. L.t -
plus as may re- ain in the treasury, after the pay
mcnt Of the annual expenditures, f,om the combined
revenue derived from customs and lands, an increas-
ed tariff might then be very justly apprehendcd be-
cause 1t would be the interest Of all to swell the ag-
gtegate receipts to the largest possible sums.
Silly. The distinction drawn between the public
lands acquired by cession and those acquired by pur-
chase, strikes us asbeing more fanciful than sound
one Of hose nice metaphysical distinctions which de-
fy he comprehension of all but The most microscopic
minds, Even If the lands acquired by treaty had
been paid for out of the ordinary revenues of the coun-
try we should question he business of the distinction;
but since II is evident tina, they were paid for by the
sales Of the lands acquired by cession, it would seem
that they are, in every respect, placed upon the same
footing and subject 10 the same principles in their
management and ultimate disposition-and upon this
superstition the government has heretofo re uniform
y acted. That they ,cere paid for out Of the land
fund is clear, from the fact that the ordinary reye-
nues ofthc country have never, in any named series
Of years, paid the ordinary expenditures, and hence
the extraordinary drafts upon the treasury must have
been l~iqnIdated by lis extraordinary resources, deriv-
cdfrom the sales of the public lands. But we have still
more conclusive evidence Of ibis assumptions. Ia
the Report made by Mr.. Ewing TO the U. S. Senate
in 1886, II is stated, that " IN every estimate winch
has been as yet presented of the costs and pro-
cceds Of the public lands, the money paid FOR Lou
isiana and Florida has been charged to thi. fund -
and the report adds, with demons,rative force, that
III the public lands have been made the fund out OF
which tins large purchase has been paid, i, is in truth
but a conversion of the receipts FOR land into other
Lands, which would as a necessary consequence,
follow the same law Of distribution which appied TO
tho original subjee, out OF which the payments were
made
1t seems TO us. therefore to be farcical TO object
to Equal distribution" as unconstitutional. while
a partial distribution has been going on for ,bi,ty
years, without the slightest objection on hat ground i.
and still more ladictous, if possible, to assent to the
coustltulionality of distribution IN reference to The
lands ceded 10 the coniederacy, by Virginia, New
York, &c. &c. and except to a similar course in re-
lation TO the lands acquired by treaty, aud which
were paid for with The funds derived from the lands
so coded.