Boon's Lick times. [volume] (Fayette, Mo.) 1840-1848, 1841-06-26

and collect taxes in order to distribute the
| proceeds among the States. Such fnan.
cial project, if any Administration were
mad enough to adopt it, would be fragrant
usurpation. But how stands the case As
to the land power1 There is not in the
whole Constitution a single line or word
that indicates an intention that the proceeds
Of the public lands should come into the
public Treasury to be- used as portion of
the revenue of the Government. On the
contrary, the unlimited grant Of power to
raise revenue, in all the forms of taxation.
would seem to manifest that that was to be
the source of supply, and not the public
lands. But the grant of power to Congress
over the public lands in the Constitution
is ample and comprehensive. The Con-
gress shall have power to dispose of and
make all needful rules and regulations re-
specting the territory or other property be-
longing to the United States" This is a
broad, unlimited, and plenary power, SUBJ
Ject to no restriction other than a sound
practical, and statesmanlike discretion, to
be exercised by Congress. 1t applies to
all the territory and property of the Uni
ted States, whether acquired by treaty
with foreign Powers, or by cessions of
particular States, or however obtained. 1t
cannot be denied that the right to dispose Of
the territory and property of the United
States includes a right to dispose of the
proceeds Of their territory and property,
and consequently right to distribute
those proceeds among the States. If the
general clause in the Constitution allows
and authorizes, as think it clearly does.
distribution among the several States will
hereafter show that the conditions on
which the States coded to the United States
can only now receive their just and equita-
bic fulflment by distribution.
The Senator from New York argued that
if the power contended for, to dispose of
the territory and property of the United
States, or their proceeds, existed it would
embrace the national ships, public build
ings, magazines, dock-yards, and whatever
else belonged to the Government And SO
it would. There is not doubt of it; but
when will Congress ever perpetrate such
folly as to distribute this national property!
1t annually distributes arms according to
fixed rule, among the States, with great
Propriety. Are they not property belong
ing to the United Statesl To whose au-
thority is the use of them assigned? To
that of the States. And we NAV safely
conclude that when it is expedent to dis
tribute, Congress will make distribution,
and when 1t is best to retain any national
property, under the common authority, il
Will remain subject to it, challenge the
Senator or any person, to show any limita-
ton on the power of Congress to dispose
OF the territory or property of the United
States or their proceeds, but that which
may be found in the terms of the deeds of
cesslon, or in a sound and lust discretion.
Come on; who can show it Has it not
been shown that the taxing power, by a
specification of the objects for which it is |
to be exercised, excludes all idea of rails
ing money for the purpose of distribution? |
And that the land power places distribution
on a totally different footing That no |
part of the proceeds of the public domain |
compose necessarily, or perhaps properly,
a portion of the public revenue! What |
is the language of the Constitution That
to pay the debts, provide for the common
defence and general welfare of the United
States, you may take the proceeds of the
public lands No, no. 1t says, for these
ends, in other words, for the conduct Of the |
Government Of the Union, you shall have
power, unlimited as to amount and objects,
to lay taxes. That is what it says; and if
you 60 the Constitution, this is its answer
You have no right to 60 for power any
where else.
Hereafter, | shall cndcavor further to
show that, by adopting the distribution /
principle you do not exercise or affect tie
taxing power; that you will be setting no
dangerous precedent, as is alleged; and
that you will, in fact only pay an honest
debt 10 the States, too long Withheld from
them, and of which some of them now
stand in the greatest neod
In the opposition In distribution we
find associated together the friends of pre-
emption, the friends of graduation, and the
friends OF a ccssion of the whole Of the
public lands to few of the States. In
stead OF approaching US with want Of con-
stltutlohal power to make an equitable and
Just distribution of the proceeds Of the
sales of the public lands among all the
States, they would do well to point 10 the
constitutional authority or to the page in
the code of justice by which their projects
are to be maintained But it is not my
purpose now TO dwell on these matters
My present object is with the argument of
the Senator from New York and his friends,
founded on financial considerations.
All al once these gentlemen seem to be
deeply interested in the revenue derivablc
from the public lands. Listen to them now,
and you would suppose that heretofore they
had always been, and hereafter would con
tinue to be, decidedly and warmly in favor
of carefully outstanding the public domain
and obtaining from it the greatest practical