Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1845-07-11
GEN. Mckay and NIr. Meares.

GEN. Mckay and MIR. Meares.
The former of the two gentlemen whose
names head this article, is tolerably we'll
known to the people of this district, as
Democrat. The latter is,
also, we suppose, known to the people of
TOM Creek, and parts adjacent, as an e.
qualIy Thoroughbred Federalist, The
former, the people Of this district have been
in the habit of sending 10 Congress, for
several years past, as their representative
and further, they propose to send him there
once more, by their votes in August next.
The latter, the famous Warsaw Conven-
ton, (when the wing spirit "blazed so
Orighty"') Town Creek, and the Will
mington Chronicle, say must and shall 60
to Washington city next winter. In the
present article we propose to show up, as
briefly as possible, the objections which
the people of the 9th Congressional Dis
trict have to voting for the latter, and the
reasons why, in our estimation, their votes
should be unanimously cast for the former.
take occasion to notice an article which
appeared in the last number of the ChrOn-
icIe, but one. We did not ourself, think
thai ii was worth while to notice it at all,
but some of our friends have called our at
tenion to the subject. The first paragraph
i'll this article is in the following words:
"The people of this district will, we trust,
bear constantly in mind the fact that General
Mckay is opposed to distribution of the
proceeds of the Public Lands; from which
proceeds, could the State of North Carolina
obtain her fair share, immense benefits would
low to the children of our district, in the way
OF helping them to obtain an education"
Now, aOe also, with our whole heart and
soul, wish that the people Of this district
''will bear constantly in mind the fact, that
Gen. Mckay is opposed to a distribution
of the proceeds of the (sales) of the public
lands"
The distribution scheme was made one
of the great issues Of the late campaign.
II stood boldly and prominently forth on
the Federal Clay flag, which erst foated
so gallantly over the Federal battlements,
and which now tails SO inglorious!y in the
dusts OF defeat. In the resolutions which
the Baltimore Convention Democratic a.
dopted in May, IA, the congregated rep
resentatives Of the republican party of the
United States protested, in the most sol
emn manner, against the doctrine Of dis
tribution. They submitted this as one O
the great issues upon which the people
of the Union were called upon to deter
mine at the November election. The Fed
eraI orators throughout the length ant
breadth of the land, advocated it, willis
the united voice of Democracy was raiset
against it. Under these circumstances, tn,
question was put TO the people of the U
MON. They rendered verdict agains
the doctrine. The people of this district
by vote of nearly two to one. We as
our readers if any thing has occurred sine
November last, to- produce a change il
their verdict. But let US examine thi
doctrine of distribution for a few moments
In the first place, we contend that it is TN
constitutional. We contend that the fun
Which is derived from the sales Of the put
lie domain, belongs to the United States
IN their federal capacity-that Congress
has no right, under our present constitu
ton, to appropriate any portion of this fun
to any object whatever, save for feder;
purposes. This fund is as much pa
and parcel of the public revenue Of the I
Mon, as the monies derived from the dl
ties levied on imports, and according
the republican creed, Congress has no MOI
right to appropriate the national revenue
any other purposes than those pointed OF
in the constitution, than il has to put i
hands into your pockets and take your pr
Vate funds, for the purpose of giving thel
to some corporation at the North. B.
suppose, for arguments sake, that we we
to admit that Congress had the eonstit
tional power TO distribute amongst the i
dividual States, the proceeds of the sal
of the public lands, the next questio
wouldbe, is it wise or expedient to exerci
this power? We hold that it would NJ
and for many reasons. Our limits w
only permit US 10 place few of the me
cogent before our readers. In the fl
place, we have the expenses of lede
government to defray. There are,