Mobile register and journal., 1845-07-22
For the Register and Joursal. THE DISTRIBUTION BILL

dents has induced 10 prepare the following digest of Mr. CALHoUN's speech on the Bill to distribute the proceeds of the Public Lands, delivered in the | United States Senate the 24ih August, 1S4l | To dispassionate inquirer, il presents all that couli or need be said against measure directly at variance wiih the prime pes of equity so utterly repugnan to constitutional faith, and SO pregnant with every element capable of rvetling up un us those chslns aleady forged by an unequal and oppressive tariff
 If in addition 10 what you have already toat ibu- ted, this synopsis should effect the object con,em- plated by your correspondent, consider the labor devoted to It we'll spent. HAMPDEN. A Digest Of arguments against the Bill to distribute the proceeds Of the Public Lands. | This bill introduced orig gnallly by Mr. Clay, while in the opposition ranks, to relieve an over buIlhened treasury.
 Congress assenled-vetoed by Gen. Jackson--
 introduced again in lS41 by Mir. Criltenden of Ken 1 lucky as an amendment to the pre-emption bill as an administration measure, during the temporary elevation of the whig pary tlro' Gen. Harrison's election, upported by Messrs. Clay and Webster opposed by Mir. Calhoun the following grounds:
 The right of the government to distribute those proceeds depends upon the question whether Inc | lands belong to the States in their united federal character, or individually and separately. l 1.-the former, government as the common agent or
 trustee has right to distribute among them for ln- dividual separate uses fund derived from proper " he Id in her united and federal character without d special power for that purpose IRIS power does not exist.
 If the lands belong the States individually, then government has the right.
 In winch of the two characters are the lands | heidi
 Virginia by her deed of cession gave them to the l rit in n ha States in their federal character. 1 The condition of the deed is that they were to be common fund, and that they ''shall be bona fde disposed Of for that purpose and for no other use | whatever"
 Mr. Clay endeavored by a sophism to prove othe- wise, because in the Virginia deed these words are used: according their usual respective proportions in the general charge and expenditure.' Doubtful expressions in a grant or any other in- strumen are not 10 be construed 10 contradict what is clearly and plainly expressed. | The cession by Virginia was made under the old articles of confederation, when general or common fund was raised not by taxation or individuals. but by requsition on the States, according 10 the value of their improved lands, and an account had to be | kept between each State and the common treasury The words cited by MT. Clay therefore were insert ed to direct that the funds from the ceded lands should be credited 10 the States., according 10 the proportion contributed 10 the common fund respec- lively. So that if the lands Jailed to supply their
 
 | Another proof that these words intend to refer 10 the manner in which the account should be kept, is that they omitted in the deeds Of cession from Massachusetts, New York, Connecticut, North and South Carolina.
 Again-Georgia, when she made her cession, did | 20 under the new or present form of government. when the old mode of raising funds was superceded by taxes laid upon the people. There being no need 10 keep the kind of account the words cited by MT. Clay were also omitted iu her deed. M. N..t,- u.Aao uraHf in fbaf hnt h the lands were ceded to the United States federal tiyely it was only Sin the first instance for the purpose of payng the public debt;" and when this was discharged, then they became the "separate property of the States"
 This is gratuitous assumption. The words of the cesson expressly provide that il "shall be common iunh for lhe use and benefit of the States in their united and federal charace," without restrc ton to the public debt, or limitation m point of time or any other respect
 | The advocate of distribution go so far as 10 ap- ply their doctrine to the residue of the public lands, including Florida, the region heyond the MS | sssippi, etc, although purchased out o the common funds of the Union, collected by taxes, belonging to the people of the United States in their federal and aggregate capacity. This violates an admitted prn- cple, that the agent trustee of common concern has no right without express authority, 10 apply the jont funds to the separate and benefit of Its ndi viua me mbers
 II the treasury is burthened with surplus beyond the wants of ihe government, why appropriate iunh resulting from the public domain as surrender to States, instead ofappying every dollar that can be spared to guard aganst coming dangers, more "e'- pecally on that element where revolution SO extra ordinary is going on by the all powerful agency oi steam, both to ihe means of attack and deience!
 To distribute the proceeds among the States would be to surrender permanent revenue of ihe govern ment m order to sustain the siskng credit Of State governments, which had contracted debts for their own individual and local purposes beyond their ordi' nary means, and which the dominant party in those States, then whgs, are unwilling 10 meet by raising taxes on their own people for fear ot being turned out of power.
 The bonds of such indebted States are possessed by capalists on ,hs and the othe< side of the At laniic speculation, as a pro6Hbe investment, many at great depreciaion, ana ibis demand or inc common treasury is made to make good not only beir losses, but to enable lhem to realize their an tcips'ed profits.
 The question now arises. how is ihis deficit to be raised. the surplus fund being distributed according