Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1842-04-06
vsRoINtA LEG.si.ArURE
SPEECH OF Ma IRVING OF Cu.nssl.sp,

COmmutee on Finance to introduce bill for the
appointment oi an agent to receive the quota OF
Virginia under the Distribution Law, together
with the anne ndment offered thereto by Mr. Holla
day. ins,ruct,ng our Senators to vote for repeal
OF the law.
Mr. IRVING said he could not expect to COM
mand the undivided attention OF the House at this
late hour Of the day, and in its present exhausted
condition; yet II they would give hun their atten-
ton Tor short time, he would endeavor TO reply,
successfully to the Arguments so zsalously pressed
upon their consideration by the gentleman from
Lou,ss, (Mr Holladay) In my remarks, said he,
I shall follow the course indicated by that gentle
man, and shalt consider both the constitu,onality
and expediency OF the Distribution law, though l
do not admit, that the resolution which l had the
houor OF submitting at oil brings into consideration
tie eonst tutonaty OF exp.disney OF that law; for,
hsimply proposed, that one ofthe standing COMMIT
t,es OF the Houss should bring IN n bill providing
for the receipt OF that portion of the public lands
which might become due to Virginia under the one
ration OF the law lately passed by Congress. This
simple resolution in no manner brought before the
House the merits or dement's Of the Distribution
Law. Inasmuch, however, as the gentleman from
Louisa has gone into the consutuionaiiiy as well as
the expcdiency OF the measure, shall not SHRINK
from meeting the issue raised by that gentleman, but
shall endeavor to reply T. his guments and show
both the coastitutionality and expectancy OF the
liw.
The power to distribute the proceeds of the pub
lie lands is rested by it's friends upon the deeds of
ceSston executed by the States ana upon tn5 Clause
of the Constitution which gives Congress the power
"to dispose Of and TO make all neediul rules and
regulations respecting the lands aud other property
ol the United States" | will first notice the nrgu.
men, of the gentleman from Louisa on this head.
IL must be perceived that language broader and
more unqualified could not hive seen employed,
and shall contend that, except so far as that power
Is cpntroverted by tho deeds OF cesEon, is IN the
discretion Of Congress 10 dispose Cf them in such
way best to conduce to the interest of the Anne
ftCan he n IN
there is distinction between the right to DISPOSE
Of the public lands and the right to dispose OF the
revenue derived from taxes, duties and imports
that the words land other property" includes the
revenue derived from imports, AMI that the power
10 distribute the proceeds OF the sales OF the public
lands necessarily involves the power TO distribute
all other revenue The first article of the eighth
section OF the Constitution provides that Congress
shall have power TO lay and collect taxes, duties,
imposis, and excuses, TO pay the debts and provide
for thecommon defence and general we fare OF the o.
s." Now, the clause "to provide for the common de.
fence and general welfare" has not been considered
by those who maintain thst the Constitution should
lie construed strictly, conferring upon Congress
any power, but as limitation upon the power
oi laying taxes, duties, imposts, and excuses no.
indeed limiting, IN themsc YES, any specific grant of
power but specifying the purposes for which "taxe.
duties SC" should be lsidihat H. to pay the deb's
and provide for the common defence and general
welfare of the ". 8" Here, then, is a Limitation
upon the power 10 dispose of the ordinary revenue
but Where Is any limitation 10 the mower of Con-
gross over the public lands and other property of
the United Statesl Undoubtedly, there is none
except so lar as the deeds Of cession may control
Congress IN the matter. Suppose the gentleman's
OF this section be correct that the words
and other property embrace the ordinary revenue
derived from customs. duties excuses and impos;s
would be Withdrawn from n clause of the Consti.
uton which hIniis the power OF Congress over it.
Ind defines the purposes 10 which IL should be np.
Piled, and would be subject TO a clause Of the Con.
nE
d rs our language can make IL. Can IL be believed
hat the trainers Of our Constitution, after specify
ng the mode in which Congress raise revenue, as
vel as the purposes for which it should I've raised
would have gone on and IN a subsequent article
uhliced the same subject 10 be disposed Of by Con.
,ress without any Imitation For NV own part,
can hardly believe that the trainers OF the Consti
.uIon, IN comforting the power upon Congress Of
iIspoung of the Public LEnds and other property,
meant TO include the ordinary revenue derived from
customs, &C. Their object WINS to include ships,
orts, docks, and any other property that might be
ons 10 the Government and which it might be pro- |
ler Tor Congress 10 dispose of. But whether am |
right or wrong IN my construction, that the words |
and other property" have no reference to the |
general revenues of the Government, is entirely |
TO the subject under consideration. III
am wrong, follows that the right dispose OF the
ordinary revenue is given by virtue OF that clause
oi the Constitution which have quoted.
The gentleman from Louisa having, however as
he thinks, established the proposition that there is
no distinction between the Distribution of the pro.
ceeds of the sales Of the public lands and the ord
nary revenue Of the Government, has conjured up
before our imaglnatons the dreadful conseuue
which he supposes will result from the admission Of
the right OF Congress to dispose of the property Of
the United States. He says if Congress had this
power, II could accomplish any thing within the
reach oil money. lie even supposes that they might
distribute ships OF war, take the arms sell the forts
md distribute their proceeds among the States All
have TO say IN answer TO these supposed cases Of
the gentleman is, that they are extreme cases and
might happen; but does the gentleman believe |
mere Is any danger TO b. apprehended from the
abuse OF the power TO dispose Of the property OF |
the United Stales7 Did the gentleman thereby |
mean TO argue against the existence OF power |
from the possibility Gifts abuse7 beg leave to call |
ms attention, las he ~ so much alarmed at the idea
OF concedng this power to Congress) 10 another |
article in the Constitution in which still more
alarming are expressly conferred upon Congress.
or instance, the power 10 raise and support ar
MES" IL may, under this provision, raise an army
oil 5oO,OOO men, as we'll as 10000. There is no
Limitation as 10 numbers. Congress, too has right
TO provide and maintain u navy" IL may, there.
lore, under this power cover your navgable waters
win It's ships. Congress can "dec'a ate war" Il
may engage The country in ruinous, oppressive, and
unnecessary wars. Ii may, for the purpose OF sup.
porting tseli IN the prosecution OF a war impose
onerous and oppressive taxes, inpos's and excuses
upon the people. AL of these powers are unoues-
toned, even by the gentleman from Louiso and
Sc'i nc VIM lOohs Win such composure upon thess
really important powers, sees 'ehimeras DIRE in
coneeding TO Congress the right 10 dispose Of the
property Of the United States
Is there no check upon this power Is there no
eheckln the TACT that the Representatives in Con.
gress are responsible TO The people, precisely as the
gentleman from Louisa and myself are rssnorsi.
bile TO our constituents Is there any danger ina
the Representatives Of the people will give ava,
the property Of their eonsttuents7 The true cbecl
upon this power 49, that which lies at the bottom
nj 80.
ty OF the Representative TO the constituent body
will now endeavor 10 show that the right of Con
gress to dispose Of the public lands as il NAV thnl
TT has been sustained by every Administration from
the adoption Of the Federal Constitution To the nre
sent time. That the right to make donafions out n
this fund has been sanctioned by the dstineuisbe,
men OF the country, Of both parties, and that thi
power has been and is now often exercised Is main
tanned by none in more qualified terms than bv m,
po itica friends Of the gentleman from Louisa.
will call the attention Of the House to an e1tr.e
rom speech delivered 10y Mr. Benton OF Nilsson,
on the bill for the graduation Of the price OF IN
Public Lands IN the year 1926:
each succeeding Congress has felt itself at liber
~ 10 make gratultous donations OF land 10 any e 7
tent u pleased. Look to the statute book its page
IRE filled with these donations from the wear l7s
down TO the present session."
Mr. Benton here enumerated many Of these dona
tons the bounty TO officers and soldiers Of the Re-
volutlon 100000 acres, in the year 1897 To netus
settlers IN Ohio, $1,000 acres 10 the French Gullops
donations 70 the Nova Scotia and Canada refuges,
bOOO,OOO acres TO the soldiers Of the late war 90
900 70 the French settlers IN Aabams; donations 10
the States for of 81 - .a..,:--