The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-06-03

and shall be laid before our readers as carry as
possible.
THE HON. H. CLAWS SPEECH ON Dis
TRIBUTION, &c.
We regret that we have for this speech OF
Mr. Clay on Mr. Critiendens motion to recommit the
Prospective Presumption Bill in order to engra DIS
trbution upon it, II delivered in the Senate the
2s,h and 29th Of January last, and was published at
length in the National Intellgencer last Saturday
We propose only to notice few of its more prom-
nent features as put forward by MI Clay
Ii is a striking fact, that import annually from
France and her dependencies 1873 900 Co., and export
to the French dominions only Si9,OOO,OOo, leaving
balance against us of $i4, 100000 Or if we exclude
her dependencies the balance against us Is $l7OO
900. This statement is made To show the proprety
of imposing duties wines and silks obtained from
France if should be necessary to increase the re-
venue.
In answer to the objection, that these imports
would operate unequaliy on the South, Mr. Clay ie-
marked, that wines consumed in the Asto
House, New York. in one year, than in any State
South of the Potomac.
The aggregate of our imports in 1910 was $lO4,
600 600 and the articles duty free are assumed to s
between fifty and sixty millions, little more tina,
half. This indicates wide field for an increase Of
imposts, prudentIy applied.
After paying interest foreign debt, we can
hardly anticipate an annual aggregate of mposts, n
healthful trade, Of more than S9O,0OO,O00. Dutfs
of 20 per cent the highest of the Compromise act sf
ter 1912, on this amount, would yield annual K
venue of only Sls,0O00OO. 1t is obvious therefoe,
since nearly half of imports duty free, that al
ditional duties will be required, especially
SIS, 100000 of revenue will fall off in Al and AZ, BY
the limitations of the Compromise act.
Senator Wright had stated, in substance, that The
right distribute the proceeds of the public lands
among the States leading to the consequence of 'up
plying the deficiency in the revenue by duties
impost implies the right Of taxing the people iaise
money for distribution. Thetwo things, Mr.. Wight
says, are identical.
Mr.. Clay agrees with Mr.. Wright, that we cannot
tax the people to raise money distribute among the
States. But he denies that the distribution of the
proceeds of the public lands is the thing and for
tes this position by considerations arising
out Of the Constitution ITSELF and history based
thereupon.
Congress shall have power to dispose Of and make
all needfu rules and regulations respecting the Terri
toryor other property belonging to the United States"
This clause is interpreted lescunghe public do
main from the right Of appropriation to the ordinary
purposes of and consecrating il to such OBJ
jects Congress may think proper, after the specific
object of the deed Of shall have been attained
The constitutional grants of power for raising
are averred be other than this, and specifically de-
signed TO pay the debts and provide for the common
IL. IL ,.a IA
there IL nothing in the Constitution to authorize the
appropriation Of the proceeds the public lands to the
ordinary purposes OF revenue. They had one sacred
object which, being attained, leaves them to the dis
posa Of Congress under the express rule above cited
Mr.. Clay notices the fact, that the distribution
scheme was once carried in Congress, in bill brought
in by himself in April, 1882, by strong majority
that it would have been carried by majority of two
thirds if it had been returned vetoed and consequent
", that il ought and would have been the law Of the
land, if General Jackson had pocketed it but by
this arbitrary suspension of the Constitution it
lost.
General Jackson expressed himself in his message
of December A, 1882, as follows:
"Previous to the formation Of our present Const-
tuition it recommended by Congress that portion
of the waste lands owned by the States should he
coded TO the United States tor the purposes Of general
harmony and fund to meet The expenses of the
Ihe recommendation was adopted, and, at diff
ferent periods of time, the States OF Massachusetts,
New York Virginia North and South Carolina, and
Georgia granted their vacant soil for the uses for
which they had been asked. As the lands may now
be considered relieved from this pledge, the object
for which they ceded having been accomplished
in the discretion Of Congress to dispose OF them
in such way best conduce TO the quiet, harmony,
and general interest of the American People" &c.
" II seems to to be policy that the public
lands shall practicable to be source
of revenue, &c.
In May 1882, Mr.. King, of Alabama, Chairman of
the Committee the Public Lands made report, of
which the following is an extract;
"This committee turn with confidence from the
land offices TO the custom houses, and say HERE are
the true of Federal revenue Gire lands to
the cultisator! And tell him to keep his money and
| lay it out in their cultivation
The object of the avowal Of this principle in both
cases is understood to have been give away the pub
| lie lands to the new States. The Inconsistency OF
this with holding to the proceeds Of the public lands
70, purposes of revenue, is what Mr.. Clay calls an
| " intermitted favor"
| General Jackson, in his Veto Message of 1888
says again
"On the whole, adhere to the opinion expressed
| by mo in my annual message of 1892, that 1t is oui
policy that the public lands shall cease as soor
as practicable, to be Of revenue, except fol
the payment Of those general charges which grow ou
of the acquisition Of the lands, their survey and sale
do doubt that it the zeal interest Of each
all the States in the Union, and particularly Of tn.
new States that the price Of these lands shall be
duccd and graduated and that, after thay have beer
offered for a certain number of years the refuse,
naming unsod shall be abandoned TO the States ant
the machinery of our land system entirely withdrawn
1t is remarked, that Gtiy millions have been real
lied out of these refuse" lands proposed be ccde,