Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1842-03-24
From the Lynchburg virginiaa.
L II f. l. A ND FUN

OF the Federal Treasury. To this argument
as a question OF mere crpcdiency, we are will
ing to concedc all the force to which il is on
titled but even in that aspect, it might b.
well replied, that the Treasures of most of .b,
States are IN no better condition, while severa
OF them are not only empty, but entirely des
titute OF any source TO which thew can resor
Tor thepurPose of replenishing them-ant,. i,
the straits to- which they are reduced. ore !,
doping the dishonest expedient of repudiat;nc
debts which they are unable to pay. upon pre-
texts which would disgrace swintling bank
rupt. We may, then, re,ort the assumption
IT the Federal Treasury is without money, $,
are those of the States. The one, however
has 1t IN It's power, by very inconsiderabIe
augmentation of duties upon articles of luxury
imported from foreign countries, by which the
products OF American industry are exorbi,an,lv
taxed, to repienish its Golfers, while the other
has no resource except by the increase of their
direct taxes upon all the persons and properly
oil their citizens, already, as heavily burlhened
as they can well bear And even in this as
poet OF the case, therefore, the expe;licncy of
distribution seems maniiest--the more espe-
ciaily as the indirect tax upon duties, (ifit i'll
crease the price of the duliable articles at MI.
which is mooted point, and which has been
TO our mind satisfactorily demonstrated not TO
be the case,) will fall only upon the poluntery
consumer, all who choose TO do so being ex-
exempted from It's operation; while tax up-
on person and property falls upon every man
whether he choose or not, and with UNEQUAL
severity upon the poor-snce The rich man
pays only OF his abundance, and the poor of
his scanty pittance. SO that, although the dis
irritation of the Land Fund may lead 20 Il
slight increase Of duties, it will also tend in
the same proportion, if iudciously used by
The States, to diminish the burlhen of direc,
taxation. 1t is npoint of fact, then, only
choice between these two methods of taxation
and 1t would seem that no man of common
assortment can hesitate in preierring tax by
duties on foreign goods, which he NAV or
may not buy, and therefore may or may not
pay the tax as he pleases, rather than a direct
TAX assessed upon his person and property.
which he mast pay, whether he will or no.
In the one case, voli;ion is left HMM the o.
ther,no
Bullet us goa step farther. Surprising the
treasures of both the Federal and State Gov
ernments, TO stand equally iii need Of the mon
ey derived from this sourcc-;he question then
arises, achich mas he best claim 10 u2 I'm
this point OF view it is simply question of
right OF property. To whom do the Lands
beiong9 We answer, in the language of the
resolution, adopted by the House of DELEGATES
OF Virginia in 1889, NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
one dissenting voice-Whig and Democrat
Tor once uniting on the common. and at that
day the undisputed ground, that thew 1bclouo
TO The States" If this be so, WHY shall we
deprive the States of the fund, in order to sun
ply the wants of the Federal Treasury when
'he States are even in more beggarly condi-
ton than the General Government Why take
the Lands from the States to which thew be-
Tong, and which need them, to give them to
the General Government to which thew do not
belong? We pause for reply.
And farther. We have the authority of
General jackson for saying the Public I.ands
ought not any longer 10 be regarded as a source
Of rcuenns 10 The Federal Government What
did he intend to do with them when he uttered
this sentiment! He was then in favor of Dis
irlbuilon himself; or if he was not, he was for
something worse, as are now, many of the
leading opponents of that policy. For we
take the ground. thai even if Distribution be
abandoned, the money arising from the Sales
OF the Public Lands will not long 90 into the
Federal Treasury, to contribute to the dminu-
ton OF duties on foreign Imports. Already
three schemes have been presented to the pub
lie, either OF which will absorb them Those
who are urging the increase of the Tariff as
an argument against Distribution are insincere.
II they are, as we know that some OF them
are, i'll favor of other appropriations of the
Land Fund which will divert it from the Or
binary expenditures of the Federal Govern
ment
For example Mr.. Benton concurred with
Gen. Jackson that the government ought not
to look to the lands for revenue. He is in ia
vor OF so reducing and graduating the prices of
the lands, as that the amount derived from
their sales shall barely cover the cost of bring
ing them into market, thereby, in addition to
The pecuniary loss to which lie will subject the
old States, by robbing them of their equal in
terest IN this great national inheritance, TEMPT
ing their best citizens TO emigra,e TO the West.
ana despollmg them of their population as well
as their weallh--inGced, making the latter the
means whereby he seduces the former from
the land OF their birth.-What is the govern
ment TO do for reuenue when his plan suc-
cccds: Is 1T not thrown back upon an in
crease OF the tariff as certainly as under the
Distribution law?
hgain--His colleague, MIR. Linn, proposes
10 set apart the proceeds of the Land sales as
iund sacred to the National Defence-in o.
iher words, to build forts and ships, to buy
cannon and munitions of war, and prepare for
emergencies that may never happen, or for
which, iftbey shall happen the spirit and en-
ergles OF the nation will always be found an
adequate resource. How much wiser, howev-
els even In this aspect, to transfer the fund to
the States, to be by them employed i'll improv-
ing their great thoroughlares, by which in the