Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1841-07-12

u
States all claimed that the public lands were a
common fund, TO be divided for the benefit of all
the States, each in its due proportion. But he
should not do it he would rather reserve to him
self the opportunity Of doing so hereafter should
the course OF the debate render il necessary and
proper, when lie should claim the indulgence of
the committee for half M hour or an hour for that
purpose. He should for the present assume that
the whole history Of the public lands proved that
they had ever been regarded as common fund,
to nure TO the benefit Of all the States. On this
point he did not anticipate my strong opposition.
He would trace this demand down to the period
of the formation Of the Federal CopstituiiHu, and
thnt polnt being settled he should then proceed 10
the residue Of the qucstiun, both MS it respected
the principle and the eXpedlcucy of the dstrbu
ton proposed Ivy this iii.
lie now came down TO the period Of the Con-
siitutiou. aud Invited The attention Of the commit
tee to this posi'ion, that the ffnmcrs Of the Con-
Sliiuiion never had viewed he public lnnds Il
fund provided to carry on the OiierDous AMI sup
ply the wants of tic Government II this prnpo-
sitiOn should once I've conceded, Inc should then
claim thai it would 10 a violation, not only Of The
Constitution, hut Of the whole csseu.n and spirit
and genius Of our Government, to devote the pub
lie domain 10 that use.
Bot before lie dwell on this essential point in
his argument, Mr.. J. said he would first give n
rapid history Of ths Efforts which had, at various
times hccn made to divide aud to dispose Of the
proceeds Of tie public lands.
Mr.. J. had said in the beginning that the con-
mlttee claimed no originality in The preparation of
this bill. IL he had stopped to trace the history
ot the past, he could have shown tia, the States
of Delaware, New Jersey, aud Maryland had ev-
cr claimed fair proportion in the proceeds of
the sales Of these public lands. He could
refer, on the pages Of their legislative history, to
resolution after resolution and report upon report,
without going further mp Than the period when
Maryland odop;ed her Constitution. She had sent
forth that Constitution 10 the world, accompanied
with an address uuequnIIeA in its ability and elo-
1ucuce in which her claim to a share in the pub
lie domain is expressly insisted on. Member af-
ter member from The delegations Of these States
had in Congress, urged the same demand Ia
lc2l, Mr.. Nlnvcy had mnde n report, continuing
urgnmen nfInrnswerah'c force and clearness In
1923, Mr.. Whi'e, and IN 1896, Mr.. DickcrSon Of
New Jersey, had advanced and defended the same
doctrine. He could refer 10 twenty o'frrs. There
was, however, in HE case of Mr.. Dickcrson this
peculiarly: that he not only insisted Oh the right
OF all tho States 10 distribution Of The proceeds
ot the public lands hut also To a distribution of
the surplus revenue in the Treasury. The sink
ing fund hal not then paid the whole of tic pub
lie debt but MIR y. had toresccm thai il shortly
must effect that desirable u,rct, and lie thegc-
fore proposed thnt the surplus coming into the
Treasury should he divided nmoug Tic States, 70
be applied to purpose OF education aud Of inter-
raj improvement. The argument of Mr.. Dick
crson had heen answered thus by the act crea-
ting the sinking fund, the public lands cousii-
tuted part of that fund il you abstract the pub.
lie lands, you violate the wise aw recommended
by the prudence and foresight Of Gen. Hamilton,
anI destroy the value of that fluid. But HAT fund
lad now ions ceascd 10 exis. Mr.. j. snid he had
ref :rred TO these things merely for the purpose Of
more fully Sustaining the position he had taken,
and showing that HE object of the bill was strict
~ in accordance with the history of the past. He
came hack, then, 10 his position that the public
doinaiI hal ncYcr been intended or expected to
he n of national revenue, or means by
which the Government of this vast nation should
depend for It's existence from day to day OH the
contrary, he claimed that by the Constitution, the
powers Of tie General Government were intend
ed to he adequate to meet and 10 provide for all
the wants Of that Government, without calling
upon the States tor single particle Of what was
theirs. The States, in framing General Govern
meut ever the whole Confederacy, conceded 10 it
the power To levy taxes on foreign imports and
internal commerce, which they denied to them
selves. 1t was argued in the Convention that, by
conlerring this power on the General Government,
it would he rendered adequate TO provide for all
It's cwn wants and liabilities aud would render tue
country powerful, independently aud happy. The
Argument iriunphed, although II had been oppos-
ed Ivy The ablest minds in the country. OF these,
| Mr. J. would refer TO hut one, Ond he had made
in his own Sinie Legislature the allest speech that
ever was made against the adoption of the Fed.
ern CONSTITUTIONAL was Luther Martin, of Ma -
| ~ land This gentleman .ud voted against the
Constitution in the Convention, and on his return
had defended that vote before his own citizens on
the express ground that the new Constitution we
TO render the Federal Government independent OF
tho Sa,es, and placed them in inferior and
subservient condition in fact, mere dcpenden-
ces of lhut Government. Yet his argument, Il
Ala
oquence tad no cifrcl to prevent The adoption o.
The Constitution; il had comparatively hut litllt
weight in the councils of Maryland: the Cons
tuition was adopted and the State surrendered lie
revenue aud all her right to regulate foreign and
domestic commerce 10 the General Governments
thereby nrning that Government with power &c
meet every emergency aud provide for its owl
continuance. But he would not debate the point
He looked at the Constitution as it stood, ant
there he found the power TO lay taxes, dli-
lies, and imposis, while the States hnd 10 re-
source 10 meet their necessities but that of direc
taxation within HEIR own Limits.
The General Government, having been cslub
lished by the StnieS, WIS omnipOlent over com
nrrce; but if the States had refused nlopt Tho
CONSTITUTIONS, how great would have been lht
power derived 10 nany Of them from lllia source
New York collected, now, nearly one third of lht
revenues Of lhr whole Union. How mary sucl
canals and railroads rs size had made or was now
cOnslrnc lDS nlSnI sue llicn have created NJ pleas
ure. Her revenue from commerce would have
built up such empire as could scarce have
, been competed with by all the Other states uni.
ted. Boston could hive done something Of tie
same kind, though on lesser scale aud Phila
delphia instead of heing burdened, MS now, will
, Il lond of internal taxes, and coming here claim
, ing ptlul share in the western lands, would lave
been the emporium of The whole " est, and the
mistress Of The Atlantic. And then, to come II
his own beloved MnryInh had She retained The
| power Of taxing commerce, how would she bayt
spurned the lhoueht Of asking the aid OF this Co
+ vernmenl for her great works of Internal ronlnu'
nication! Those taxes would have made her in
! dependent Of aII.iexterna aid. She might have
I inpped the valley of The Mississippi and pourec
n full tide uS the wealth of The West upon hc
great Atlantic cities aud among all the enlerpris
ing population. Had Richmond aud Norfolk III,
ownership of lie duties on foreign aud doniesll,
$ commerce, with what lofty pride would they hay,
sc0rned Inc thought OF coming and asking of hi,
: hpn thau bnI