Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-08-12

S~,nm,rs 1aiiaterrc J. q. Thompson, r. W. 7homp
Son Tomliason, 1rambM, Uatiaee, Warren, naSh
;uyioa Wa,terson, T. ID. White, !. h. bhae' H. ."
n;L;nms. Il. UIiiams, c. n. Halianss, lorGe' Il
Young J. Young
aSl.ssrs adams, Atherton, Baker, Banks ieesoh'
Rdlsrk Biyd.eue, Bordn, Bovine, Boyd, EHg9S'
Br,rirau, A. V. Brown, G. Brown, Burke hnr"e",
G. Caldwell! Clifford, Clinton, Cooper, Cra"sion, Cfa'
INNS Cross, Cushng, d. Davis, }. Dawson, Dean
No. Eastman, J, Edpards. J &. Edwards, Egbert,
r.r5;s ]. G. Floyd, &. A. Floyd, F"rnance. Gerry
cardnn. Cuisine, Habersham, Hait, ~ 5 Hastnss'
HASTINGS. Henry Hopkins, Houck, Houston, fnd'
SON C. j. lngersoll, j. Hria, ". w. r~tn' 1acR'
lanes. c. Johnson, kelm, Kennedy, Lan', La"
rsmee I,tlc6eld A. Mcclellan, R. Mcclellan, Mckay
uaUnry. Marclland, A. Marshall, Mathews, Miller,
NawI,.rd parmenter, Pumer, Pope, Ramsey, RdndofP,
nomnnlds Ripqs uttoRStaH, Sanford Shaw, SIMON.
,an SNYDER. Seenrod SrGton, Sumter, Sweeney,
TT,;,ohas, 1oiand, Trpicn Turney, Iader'rood, Van
Buren,, Ward, Westbrook, "'n'hr"p' 'tse' WOOD
10 ANALYSIS of these votes, it will be seen that this
vas carried in both Houses By the votes of a
;oi,y Of those friendly to the principle of dsiribu
,;" md thus the friends of distribution themselves
xed and laid down the limitation that no distribution
sbond take place during any period whenever there
hnIJ Le occasion for duties on any articles OF I'M.
oor,s exceeding the amount of twenty per cen'u;n al
valorem. TIT
hin be;nr the 2j,h sectlon TO repeal this provso and
that is to say, the repeal OF II is stuck, as
r;dar nm the back of the Tariff bill. 1t is proposed,
nv ,hose who fixed and settled this fundamental condl-
don Of distribution, repeal and unfx that funda
mental condition T., Gu,
and unstable legislation, in the same Congress which
nresc rbed and established the terms ard conditions oil
i distribution undertake TO repeal those terms and
conditions That duties exceeding 20 per cent would
no NODDED was lust as well known then as now. With
reference to which knowl ledge, the provlso was made
permanent in terms declaring that distribution should
he suspendcd during the imposition of duties above ~
per cent and so continue until this clause OF suspen.
sion should lie removed, and when removed II not pre-
vented by other provisions OF the act such dstrihu-
ton should be renewed.
II is not fair mode of legislation. tariff act pro-
viding revenue for the Government, and, IN the ar.
ronccmc Mt and discrimination of the duties, aordlng
protection 10 the industry Of the people, is primary,
necr ssary, indispensable thing The repeal oil the es
ablished terms and conditions OF the Distribution act
is not necessary object, but one only oil secondary
erpediencv 10 say The most which can be said III lis
favor To associate these two things together, and 10
make the first depend upon The second, Is not an equ-
able or fair mode oil legislation
II IS affirmed in many of the newspapers, either
rnoran,y or for the purpose oil deception That You
must preserve the Distribution act-thnt the object OF
this 18th section is TO preserve that ac-and that those
who 20 AGAINST this 18th section OF the Tariff act, IN
80 dong 90 against Tie Distribution act. That is
false This 2jii section Of the Tariff act proposes TO
repeal a fundamental part of the Distribution act In
striking out this section, you leave the Distribution
act To stand entire in the and with the conditions
which the present Congress has itself prescribed.
In addition TO this know, since the President re-
turned the temporary Tariff bill with his objections,
that in retaining the 25th section, all we DO is 10 fish
FOR another veto.
In fact, the effect Of this 9th section is 10 enlarge
and extend the operation of the Distribution act, be-
vond the conditions and limitations, which the present
Congress has itself recently prescribed, as being in
the opinion Of the Wing majority The wise and proper
conditions and limitations.
IS the financial condition of the Federal Govern
mcn, at the present time, such rs to warrant this?
When the Treasury is exhansted-when all The re
sources of the Government are insufficient Tor II neces
sary expenscs-when there IS already large debt
when every day is adding to that debt-when IT is
matter of the most painful difficulty to raise ways and
means TO carry on the Government, is 1t wise opera
ton financially speaking, TO throw away any addition
Al mart of those resources and 10 20 and borrow
mole money for the purpose oil distributing The money
50 borrowed among The States: Surely not.
There are gentlemen who profess readiness and a
determination 10 sacrifice the Tariff ITSELF rather than
no: accomplish the object Of now repeating their own
limitations Of the Distribution act; that is TO say, TO
bankrupt the Government, to dsband The army TO dis
mantle the navy, TO stop the action OF the Departments,
and TO keep the trade industry and business OF the
whole country on stretch Of distraction, prosra,on
and agony until the next Congress shall come together,
or the next President be chosen, rather than not now
carry this proposed repeal Of Of the fundamental
conditions Of the Distribution act.
Are the people willing to submit! 10 all this, for the
purpose Of gratifying the schemes of politicians; Are
they content lie thus vctmized for such obj
And is the object worth SO much, that you are wiling
TO pay all tins price for the chance of getting ii:
For, remember, II is but chance.
The newspapers argue the point OF this 18th section,
as If the ques,ion was of the original passage OF
the Distribution act whereas the express object OF The
section is 10 repeal fundamental part of that act
Take H. however, either way and the question recuTs
! Mat is the true value of the object
Much learning and ingenuity have been expended
in the encayor 10 show that the public lands actually
belong of right to the several States in their separate
capacity, and not to the Federal Government. Sup
posing (Which is not true) that this argument were
made out in any degree, still it would avail but little
for it only applies 10 that part OF the public DOMAIN
which, consists of gratuitous cessions made by the
States In respect to that part, it shuts out FROM
consideration all the money which the Federal Govern
ment has itself paid of the Federal Treasury, and
derived from Federal taxes, TO conduct the military de-
fence of those lands, and 10 complete the title by buy
ing out the occupation of the Indians. And making
Tie best Of the argument, it applies 10 hut small part
of the public lands nasmuch by far the largest part
Of the existing public domain consists of territory paid
for with money BY the Federal Government and pur
chased from France Spain To part of this great
division Of the public domain does the argument at
lach.
!
individual States, and you could make out the right
upon the original Virginia and other cesslons prior To
The Constitution then in proportion as you make out
any such right to the portion oil the pubic DOMAIN com
pretended those ccssons you do in the same breath
establish the fact that the separate States have no Sc
parae interest Whatever in the residue OF The public
domain that is 10 say, in the far larger and more va
liable part of it, which the Federal Government &C
quired by purchase for money, since the adoption oil
the Constitution.
Accordingly, distribution, as covering the whole
public domain, must be justified upon considerations
Of expectancy.
AS question of exrediency, there has, il seems 10
me, been extreme exaggera,ion IN this case on both
sides.
| 1t is The misfortune Of political controversy in this
country, though, in another point of view,
of the comparative felicity Of lot, that questions
like THIS, OF mere pecuniary expedlency, winch may
be decided either way without very seriously affecting
the public n,ere sis, should grow, when seen through
the magnyiug glasses Of party into imaginary great
ness and fictitious consequence, for time, and come
to be sincerely regarded by many as siions of prn
! CHILE