Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1842-05-23

T!lr ZnnciiDnrg TtrDintan.
.NO.ND1I. MY p. lsl2.

Tre Coastraet,oa II the Desi, II ccsson--7 Tie Ord

Tine Coastraeioa = The Defds u Ccssio,--7lc Ordi-
Hoaee u les.
We have the rleasuf. 1T h. M lelre readers an
able though a condensed argument in reference to tie
true construction Of the deeds Of q sson from tho
eral >ai,s. conveying the Public lands IN trust To the
general government. Il Is contained letter from q.
II Smith. Esq Of tie sonaiors irn Indiana. and
the distinguished chairman Of tie committee Of Public
Lands 10 gentleman IA ncichbufeg county, who has
permitted 10 present it toihc public through cur col
umns.
WNHiacroN Cnr ilt Nay, ts42.
nat Sif.-i our le,ter Of the 30th ut las been re
cesod. and would have been answered fefe this bat
r The pres Of matlrr, requiring my attention. aud
nov, | can do lte mure than glance at the subject
which you bring my n5tee, upon she questions ans NJ
under the deeds # eoss5n. oppressed ycry fully ih
opinion IN ny tSrse 1bo i.aad H al the Extra Scs
sian. IN ny s ocb At lic present session ny uJHr VAS
nat much 10 give construction 10 the drss II eos
SIN, - thy cover u7ly part Of tie Public laud To
meet the general argument 81 NIHt 81 power Ia J
tribute the proceeds at the lands. cAbr. BIZ IL
deeis ees'aa, }on vii sec by a con- u ,q speerb
winch send ~, and which W. satisfactory at lfas, +,
Tic iffhas9 Tie lnf2= Nj Calhoun and others |
4Hr' ls'.-h assumed that II IS constitutional 10 p1art
ae aal u the States and aulhofl,. them h sch and
distribute tIc proceeds hul tati Is mol constitutional To
-sli he lands aud distribute tho prieroJ, auunI tie
l.
. as o. p SAID, believe thc constitutional que
ueu IS considered herr settled, and that the eApedi
enry II tie Distribution art aud mol IT'S eousuii8ualily
Will ae thu only question hereafter.
No 10 tie construction 10 be given 10 The dcc1s Of res
siep ! have Thought. and still think thai there
uud be reasHnabl, douht singe consideration is
tn ny mind conclusive Aaye never healdit answered
tfm any quarier-and at Is tbs. The deed executed
by Virginia hears date Lfarf the adoption Of lle federal
constitutions the decd 81 Georgia bears date Gfie that
time and yet the language of the drcds Is similar
The former provided that the ccdod lands shah he
'eon>idcffd common fund for the and benefit Of
such IT tie ued States have become or STALL be
como members Of tho Confederation or tie Federal a
'tlaner Of the suld States. NmGfNIt I>oir.tE. ac-
'eHrdng Ia Their HTSrEt1nr rHororTfu~s IN the zen
''eral charge aud udItrrc' 1t the tune tins deed
WIS executed iEGfNR was member 81 the confodera
ton Of federal alliance Now. If the construction that cur
opponents contend lor he the true one. | would BIKE
5nlnc one 10 answer these qucSaus-Nhy did the decd
OF rcssiun convey 10 tho Of tho RESPECTIVE STATES
aud MT 10 ihe tosFrnrRtuos2 And why WIS NiR-
GINA mcindodm terms when she was at the time a
neber oi the cunlcdenron If the deed was merely in
tended To convey the property 10 the use of the
members Of the Confederation And Why WAS II insert
cd That the use was 10 lc Ia THE Sr,rts in rRoron
HON 10 Their RESPECT charges IN tho general tNpcu-
dnuTe If II Vas . joISr concern for JoIhr bcncfl,-
ms position Il Sti mnTc sruupy sustained hv the deed
from ho"f9la. That decd was executed on the lGll ct
June, lNf2, and Is similar 10 the one have noticed. 1t
also ihclodts the CEpiNG STATE III press terms
"GEonoa INcLunrn'-and vet GEORGIA nj the time
WAS one 81 the States ni the mon Now. if the Oh
lfrt MIS- a common one, would not tie deed have con
Yeyed to the use oi the iHited St0ies and not the
STATES OF mt MON. including the ccdmg Stae}-
W ny inclodt li'e State. IN terms, when CONVEYANCE
Ia The utod States for their would have included
snrh Sian. II the uIec had been object Tor
the use and benefit OF The non and not separate one
iai Inc behthi 81 the States, III proportion to their share
III thu general cafg Such was the conrsc nt reasoning
anu such the facts thai brought my mind satisfactorily
10 the conclusion 10 winch ii has at various mes ar
rlycd on the subject.
The argument you have introduced 10 my notice clear
~ sustain, this view. Ihe Ordinance to which YOU re
irr passed Way %, les. after tie execution OF the
deeds OF cesson Of Virginia aud Massachusetts,.
may be considered AZ giving caiemporaneous cNposi
ton o losc deeds, to lhtlr intent and meaning
notwithstanding that ordinance vas declared 10 be- in
convenient m practice. aud MAS r,i,alud by the odl
nance OF 9Th July, l7sS III, toumCr ordnance atcf
providing tJr the continental army from certain lands
declared that Tile Board olTieasuy shall from time
TO time cause the remaining numbers as well those Ia
hc sold entire as those TO be sold in lots be drawn
'ur. IN the Of the THIRTEEN STATES RES
'rEt rh Ely. according 10 the arorts in the L,sl
'rRrcrn'NG RrarHIrloN on all the States: PRO
'rded' that IN case MORE LAND than lis propo,iioa
is allotted for sale IN dy State at Any pisrEigt roN
"a Deduction be made therefor al rur NtNr' Then
are two questions, presume. under this ordinance up
on which You desire my opinion. The FIRST is-Was
tins ulsrmncrloN among the States Of the land, a
9r'eahy Ia the pov,sluns of the decd olc'suu2 haSt
"A" doubt thai 1t Was 50 IN principle. though proved Il,
should have supposed "neouyencnt' in practice
sun, It gives what conceive 10 be the construction
The deeds Of ccsson understood thoI time aud as
still con=ue ihem. The ucN question is neither tn,
particular State. nndc a'r construction ot The ordinance
would te entitled 10 4 credit tur the amount received
rom the sale of the land. drawn in the name Of Sucl
STATE, Tar 50 much IN discharge Of the rcquison u
the Confederation upon such State for her proportion u
The general charge and expenditure? Such would seen
|" he very clearly The east, the ordinance was q
No iarre OF use whatever have just briefly touche,
tins question, nay Time not permitting me 10 20 SO full
INTO the subject as you may have desired
Very Respectfully.
Your ebcdient servant.
o. II. SMITH.
Th" argument Of Mr. Smith based upon the phrascola