The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1844-09-02
would huVe received.

Total share OF VI for III years, Sl,0ll,S5O 81
Average OF WIS share per year, lao, l6s 20
Vermont ,could have received, under Mr. Clay's
bill, ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY THOUSAND
DOLLARS A YEAR; but of this she has been rob
bed b y locolocoism, j. X. Polk being an alder and
ettor in the robbery. But do not claim that this
is the which Vernon; probably will receive un-
der Mr. Cuy's administration, because the above in
cludes the extraordinary sales occasoncd by the spec
uluting mania Of 1885 and 1896. As fair approx
nation to the which Vermont probably wiH re-
ceve, we will take the average from the CO mmence
ment of the present land system:
Nett proceeds from ls2It to ls4l
both inclusive, SIO6, 263, 444 81
Share of Vermont, 2,Ol3,527 7S
Average proceeds per year, 5000. l64 Oh
Share of Vermont per year, $3.50 "a
The official reports prove, therefore that under the
rule of distribution adopted by Mr. Clay bill, tho ave.
rage share of Vermont from 1921 TO 1871 would
have been nearly 500 900 year. Her share how
ever, would have been actually much more, because
for part of the period here embraced the population
of Vermont greaterin proportion to the other
states than it was in 1880, which the basis Of
distribution Remembering that adequate protection,
by stimulating every branch Of business directly lends
to the occupation and improvement of the public
lands, may with fairness and reasonable certainty
assume that the Wing policy, OF PROTECTION
AND DISTRIBUTION, will tot only encourage and
protect the people of Vermont, but give annually TO
her treasury tine sum of $780, 900 which is legally
and righfuIly hers
Be it remembered, then, that Polk and the locoloco
party will rob the treasury of the people of Vermont
ofthis sum, ic the power is committed to their hands.
Polk AVOWS this as his policy-the locofocos even
here avow it.
Objections HnStrered
Why should vermonters permit this robbery One
Iocotoco replies that the money will be unequOIy d.
>ided niter we get it, for instance If applied to pay
the expenses ofthe government, the rich will be
benefited than the poor man, because the rich
pay moro than the poor in all the grand list,
This is no objection TO receiring the money from The
gore, nment but simply TO the disposition of it, after
it mas been received reply TO it, the people Of
Vermont may use the money they please when
they get it, We will trust the people to take of
their interests, for it to that is strange
democracy which tells the people that they shall
have their own, lest they use it fooshy!
Another locofoco bjects that ir the land money is
distributed the Government must raise much more
by duties-that these duties are in fact taxes upon
the consumers,-and that for every dollar the people
receive they pay dollar, and the additional expense
of dsbursing and collecting it, or, to the OBJ
lection actually made to US, "every dollar we get
81 so" This objection has air Of paus-
bty about it, and yet is every way delusive. The
is this precisely: the government has certain a.
mount of to raise, and Tariff, either high
or low, and the land system, would DO maintained,
whether the policy Of distribution is not adopted
There would be material difference in the cost of
collecting the under either policy for would
require at least as much force to collect the required
revenue, (be the what it will, under tariff Of
low duties high onefor in either the sum is
to be collected at the same places, by the Off
GERS, and under the regulations except the
amount Of duty. The difference to Vermont on this
point is simply this aohout distribution she pays her
proportion of the cost Of collecting the revenue and
gets nothing while tDih distribution, she pays no
more and gets her 100000 per annum. As to the
other point to w.t. that the increased duties raise
the to take the place of the land fund, is tar
upon the consumers, and therefore foolish tax upon
ourselves to raise money put into pockets
When applied protected articles to the line Of fair
competition this false free trade doctrine and if
the ocoiocos believe it, they consummate hypo-
critics for pratng about protection This doctrine is
utterly exploded by facts within the remembrance Of
every man who remembers the prices before the pro-
tectiye policy and the prices since. For instance