Boon's Lick times. [volume] (Fayette, Mo.) 1840-1848, 1842-09-03

to convey by deed, unto the United States,
for the benefit of the said States, all her
right, title and claim to the North western
Territory. subject to the terms and cond-
tons agreed upon. Among these terms
and conditions, is the very clause.
$50 much commented upon to sustain the
new theory in regard to the character of
the cession.) which is set forth in ipsisSimis
rermis in the act. Nothing can more conclu-
sively show what was the understanding of
this clause by the General Assembly of
Virginia than that, in the preamble of the
very act setting it forth, together with The
other condition of the cession. they refer
to the cessions of territory which had been
invited by Congress as being for the "com-
mon benefit of5the Union" and in Weld
ing to this recommendation, they express
1.-The full confidence that Congress WILL in
Justice to this State, for the liberal cession
she hath made, earnestly press upon the
other States claiming large tracts of waste
and uncutivated territory, the propriety of
making cessions, equally liberal, for the
common benefit and support of the Union"
The Legislature of Virginia, in this act,
seemed to have taken especial care, by the
use of the collective term, (Unon,) to ex.
clude every appearance of ambiguity, and
to show, beyond all controversy, that the
cession made by them was for the benefit
of the United States in their aggregate. and
not their individual capacity. And yet this
pregnant Interpretation of the character
of the cession in the very act under which
it is overlooked-a circumstance the more
remarkable inasmuch as the whole act is
set forth and recited in the Deed of cession
itself.
Mr. Smith. Of Indiana, chairman of the
Committee on the Public Lands, here re.
marked that an ordinance was passed by
Congress, very soon after the cession by
Virginia, providing for distribution among
the States.
Mr.. Rves said he was quite surprised
that gentleman presumed to be so CONVEX
SAINT with the history of our land laws as
the honorable Senator from Indiana, should
for a moment, have been deceived as to the
true character of that ordinance. VIVA
was it, Mr.. President! 1t provided fo
the appointment of surveyors and geog
rapher to lay off the public lands into suita
bic and convenient divisions, and sub-divi
sions, and directed the plats of these sur
yeys to be returned to the Board of Treas
ry, when the Secretary Of War was to
draw by lot one seventh part of the town
ships and fractional parts of townships &c
satisfy the military claim, and "then the
Board of Treasury was to cause the re
naming numbers to be drawn for, in the
name of the thirteen States, respectively
according TO the last preceding requsitiol
on all the States" But what, then, was t.
be done with these townships and parts O
townships, so drawn for in the name of tn,
respective States! Were they to become
the property of the respective States, il
whose name they had been drawn, or to b,
sold for the particular benefit of those
States respectively? No such thing. The
plats were simply to be sent to the State:
in whose name they may have been drawn
TO be there sold at public vendue by. the
Commissioners of the Loan Offices; and
the proceeds of the sales were to be paid
over, not to the States, but to the Treasu-
~ Of the United States, as my honorable
friend would have seen, if he had looked
little farther into the ordinance. Is this
the sort Of distribution which would salts
fy the honorable SENATOR | fancy not
1t was simply an expedient for distributing
the sale Of the lands through the States,
as Mr.. Madison described it in letter to
Governor Randolph, (Which will be found
in the second volume of the Madison pa
pers, and not system for distributing the
proceeds of the sale among the States. I,
was probably resorted to, in order to en-
large the sphere of competition in the sale
of the lands, and to give to the citizens OF
the respective States fair opportunity OF
participating in the purchase, according to
10 their means. Whatever was the motive
Of it, it was very soon abandoned, and gave
way to another ordinance, which directed
that the sales of the lands should be made
at the place where Congress shall sit" My
honorable friend, think, will find quite as
much in the one of these ordinances as in
the other, to sustain the modern doctrine OF
an absolute vested right in the several
States TO distributive share of the pro.
ceeds of the public lands.
But does not the honorable Senator per.
ceivc that if even his theory of the rights
of the States under the Virginia Deed OF
cession were correct, it, by no means iusti-
ties the Distribution which he so ably car
rled through, during the session of Con.
grcss. He must show that he has pursued
and coniormed to the deed under which he
claims. Can he do SOL The deed of ces.
sion provides that the States should receive
the benefit Of the common fund, according
10 their usual respective proportions in the
general charge and expenditure. But tn,
law of the last session wholly departs from
IL. =