Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1842-03-28

ever, leading Politician u every party, n'a ne, with
this ridiculous Observation-Disclosures certainly IN The
mouths Of those who it, and who profess 10 look, III
their interpretations uf the coUstltu0n, 10 the express
grants which il Contains Let us test the Distribution
Law by this rule, and the result. There Is specl
fc clause Of the constitution which gives 10 Congress the
unlimited right-unmiicd, by the discretion OF
Congrcss-,o " dispose IF the public properg"--a
clause under which millions Of acres of the Public
Lands have been already distributed among the
States, while the others have received no deuccurs
Of the kind either in the shape Of lands money and
large grants have likewise been made to foreign om
grants under colorado prc,ext other What
right had Congress to give lands 10 these foreign
cmigrantswhat right Inappropriate millions OF acrcs to
the benefit of the States Ill has right to dds
pose of portions of them for the benefit of the older
Statesl by what right does Congress make psrli al
distribution, if it has right 70 make equal dstribu
toni Whence the authority to give to tcr, lift may
not give to all? And if it may give every sixteenth
section 10 new State, why may /. not distribute the
remaining fifteen sections or the equivalent in money
they be sold, to the other % States Gen. Jackson
long ago asserted the unlimited discretion of Congress
over the whole subject and it never denied or
questioned until it became necessary to render the Dis
trbuton policy oduus, and to overthrow the irresistible
arguments in its favor, based upon its expedency by
the assumption of its unconsuonality. Not only is
there specific grant Of power to Congress, in refer
to the disposal Of the property, embracing Of
the public lands, but there is specific grant auhor
zing the Of the land fund rercaue applicable to
tho ordinary expenditures Of the federal government
We invite the attention of the s.rct co,str,ctonsts
specially to this fact We call upon the Editor of the
Enquirer in his own stereotyped language, to put his
finger upon that clause Of the constitution ,raich author
ICES Congress 10 sell the public land. for the purpose Of
raising rercnue, which ustes such use Of tho land
fund No such clause is to be found. There are orly
two modes of raising rerenue prescribed by the consl
tuition. One is by direct taxation, the other, by the i'm
position of du,es upon foreign commodities entering our
ports. strict construction Of the constitution, there
FORE not only justifes distribution by the unlimited
power conferred upon Congress in the disposal fthe
lands, but it expressly fabids the Of the proceeds o,
the sales Of the lands ordinary rerenue by pointing
out other and the ONLY MODES in which Congress
can repensh the treasury. Thus, looking at the con
,ttuon both in its mandatory and its prohbory aspects
it manestly sanctions distribution and forbds the use
of the land fund ordinary revenue And it follows
that the opponents ofdstrbuon- who are in favor
themselves flying in the teeth Of the constitution and
violating not only its express letter. bu, its manifest in
tentlon.
When the South Carolina politicians took the ground
that all duties upon imports laid for the express purpose
of revenue constitutional but that when they exceed
in amount the necessary for the wants Of the gov
eminent, economically administered they become uncon
stitutiona they imposed upon themselves the perf1r
E l,,.., Ill.
discharge They must first, upon this assumption, de
eide precisely what Of revenue is necessay-and
secondly what racof duties upon each article will produce
precisely the sum required. For, if one dollar more
expended than s absolutely necessary if one dollar is
raised above the sum expended the constitution
ding to their theory just much violated as if the OK
penses millions beyond economical standard
as it, the expenses being restricted within proper limits
} millions more are raised than necessary for thai
purpose 1t is their duty to tell when tariff bill is un
der discussion. at what precise point ends
protection begins. They must scale the duties with
mathematical nicely and accuracy. Who do this .
The attempt would battle the acu,est ingenuity. Ever
South Carolina Nullifyer, who demonstrate thai
State can be in and ont Of the Union the same time
would find himself on-plusscd should he attempt te
define the limits Of the taxing power. according tn,
rule OF constitutional construction for which he contends
The rule itself is mpracticable and absurd and consc
qnenty is self condemned The trainers Of the cons
tuition, could never have designed to limit power which
IN It's very nature must be changcabe the circuit
stances and condition of the country. The revenue
which may be adequate to the demands upon the trca
sury in one year may be wholly insufficient to meet the
unforeseen emergencies of the next. Hence the du
ties upon imposts must be variable and contingent upon
the necessities which may call for greater or less
mount of expenditure. Hence, the falacy of tn. rule
and the folly of its authors. But it par with ma
NY other cases in which this test of consu
tondhtyis applied without rhyme or reason, BY men
who always find in it an ad capmdm ii not a concu
sive argument against any measure which they do not
comprehend, or against which they devise no solid
objection.
i ALABAMA TARIFF CONVENTION.