Litchfield enquirer., 1842-08-25

OOs@~SNOob
renee, for the closing paragraph Of.the mes
sage, recurring again to the same trouble
some remeniscence, observes that, after all,
| the effect OF what he does is substantially
to call on Congress to reconsider the subject.
If, on such reconsideration, q majority of
two-thirds of both Houses should be in ia
vor of this measure, it will become law
| Notwithstanding his objections The truism
of this remark may perhaps be accounted
for by the surmise that it was a new Disco
very, made since the Philadelphia dinner
party letter; and the modest presumption
I ascribed to the Constitution that the Execu-
tive can commit no error of opinion unless
two-thirCs of both branches of the Legisla-
ture are in conflict with him, is tempered
by the amable assurance that in that event
he will checrfully acquiesce in a result
which would be precisely the same whether
he should acquicsce in it or not. The apti-
tude of this hypothetical position may be
estimated by the calculation of the chances
that the contingency 1t Supposes is within
the verge Of possibility.
The reasons assigned by the President
for his objections to this bill are further pre-
ceded by narrative of his antecedent opin-
| ions and communications on the subj of
distributing the proceeds Of the sales of the
public lands. He admits that at the opening
of the extra session Of Congress he recon-
mendad such distribution, but he AYERS
that this recommendation was expressly
coupled with the condition that the duties on
imports should not exceed the rate Of 20 per
cent provided by the compromise act of
1893.
Who could imagine that, after this most
emphatic coupling Of the revenue from du-
ties of impost with revenue from the pro-
ceeds of the sales of the public lands, the
first and paramount objection of the Presi-
dent to this bill should be that it unitcs two
subjects, which, so far from having any af-
! finity to one another, are wholly incon-
gruous in their character-which two sub
jects are identcally the same with those
which he had coupled together in his recon-
mendation to Congress Mt the extra session?
If there was no affinity between the parties,
why did he join them together! If the I'M
ion vas illegitimatc, who was the admins
tering priest of the unhallowed rites! 1t is
objected to this bill that it is both a revenue
and appropriation bill. What then! Is
not the act of September A, lS4l, approved
and signed by the President himself, both a
! revenue and appropriation bill? Does it
not enact that, in the event ofan insufficient
cy of mpost duties not exceeding twenty
per cent. ai valorem, to defray the current
expenses of the Government, the proceeds
of the sales of the lands shall be levied rs
part of the same revenue. and appropriated
to the same purposes! The appropriation
OF the proceeds of the sales of the public
lands to defray the ordinary expenditures Of
the Government, is believed to be n system
of fiscal management, unwise, impolitic,
improvdent, and unjust and il is for that
reason that the bill now before the House
provides that they shall be so appropriated.
The public lands are the noble and map
probable inheritance of the whole nation.-
The sale Of them TO individuals is not a,tax
upon the purchaser. but an exchange of
equivalents scarcely more burdensome 10
the grantee than if he should'receive it as Il
gratuitous donation. 70 appropriate the
proceeds of the sales to dcfray the ordinary
expenses of the Government is to waste and
destroy the property. This property is
held by Congress in trust. Mr.. Tyler speaks
of the distribution as if it was giuing Array
the property. 1t is precisely the revcrse,-4 |
It is restoring it TO the owner. To appropri- |
ate the proceeds to- deffay the current feX-
penditures is togiveit up to- dilapidatiOn |
and waste. 1t is in political economy pre-
ciselv the same as if an individual landhod- !
er should sell of, year after year, parcels
of his estate, and consume its proceeds in
the payment of his household expenses
The first principle of political economy ne
cessary for n nation is to raise by taxation
within the year the whole sum required for
the expenditures of that year. Every de-
parture from this principle is step in the
path of national bankruptcy and ruin. The
daily demands of the treasury must be sup
piled by the income derived from taxation
by the year, and not by the dissipation of
the common property.
The second reason of the President for
Directing to tho passage of this bill is not
more ponderors than the first. 1t is the
destitute and embarrassed state Of the trea-
sury, and the impolicy, if not uncons,itu-
tionality, of giving away fruitful source
of revenue, which, if retained, may be seiZ-
ed by the Government and applied to meet
its daily wants. But the President had Just
told us that this fruitful source Of revenue
was a subject wholly dissimilar in its char
acter from that of a revenue raised by du-
ties of impost-so dissimilar that the union
of them formed in his mind an ins,,rmount-
able objection to the passage of the BILL
p" most respectfully submit (says the mes
sage) whether this is a tine to give away
the proceeds of the land sales, when the
public lands constitute fund, which of all
others may be made most useful in sustain
ing the public credit" And how could it
be made thus useful! Precisely by giving
them away. by giving them away forever!
For if the principle be once established that
the proceeds of the sales of the public lands
shall be substituted in the place of revenue
by taxation to defray the ordinary annual
expenses of the National Government, ne
yer more will the people Of any state in this
Union have the benefi: of one dollar from
this richest of mines of inexhaustable wealth
bestowed upon them by their bouptiful Gre
ator for the improvement of their own con-
tesN IR.aA 60 l.