Boon's Lick times. [volume] (Fayette, Mo.) 1840-1848, 1846-11-21
GOVERNORS MESSAGE.


our State Government meets again to consult a
about the interests OF the people. n"s.. 10
3D. Our Constitution provides that '1he Governor
shall, from time to time, give 10 the General As
sembly information in relation TO the state Of the
government, and shall recommend TO their con
sderation such measures as he shall deem neces
sary and expedient." In dischareing my duty
under this provision, shall notice some matters
briefly, which it will become necessary 10 ex.
plain more in detail as your session progresses
Since the last meeting Of the Legislature, the
State Government has moved on in It's usual
peaceable and quiet course. The laws have been
generally respected, and but little resistance has
been any where made 10 their faithful execution.
Every proper effort has been made to bring OF
tenders to justice, and but few thus lar have elu'
ded the vigilence Of our officers, or escaped the
merted penalties OF the law. The pecunisry |
engagements Of the State, except some delay in
| her own officers, have been every where met and
promptly discharged
An action was commenced during the last year,
against one Of The citizens Of the City Of Jelfer-
son, to recover a lot covered by the New Madrid
or De Lsle claim. Several efforts were made to
employ counsel to defend the suit, as required by
an oct OF the Legislature, passed in 1S41,
but the defence was not undertaken--the Ice
being deemed inadequate to the responsibility to
be assumed in undertaking the case. The suit
now stands continued; and, as it involves the title
10 much property which has been sold by the
State it may require further attention by the Leg
lislature. ...
The Northern boundary case still remains I'm.
settled. Preston Mulnix, for whose defence
against the charge OF exercising the duties OF his
office Of Sheriff, over the disputed territory, ap.
preparation was made by the last Legislature, was
pardoned by the Governor Of Iowa. before going
to trial. The agreed case. provided for by anoth
er act of the same session, between the State OF
Missouri and the State Of Iowa, as then suppos.
! ed, about TO be admitted into the Union was
never made up; the State OF Iowa refusing 10 &C.
cept the conditions upon which Congress agreed
. TO admit her into the Union, and thus failing to
qualify herself TO become party to the suit
At the last session, Congress provided for taking
the case to the Supreme Court Of the U. States;
I but since then, Iowa has adopted another Cons
be settled, will probably be admitted into the
:" Union. When Iowa is admitted into the Union.
5 the United States may no longer be a party to
I the case, and her admission may thus interfere
with the settlement OF the question again. If so,
further legislation seems 10 be required on this
D subject. An agreed case between the two States
as provided by the last Legislature, may be the
proper measure.
= In connection with the foregoing subject, il
-, may be proper 10 observe, that although some ex.
element has prevailed among The citizens along
e the border, yet the friendiest feelings seem to
v have existed between the authorities Of the State
. and Territory and most anxious desire To have
the question Of boundary amicably and speedily
= settled.
:, The last Legislature passed law distributing
e the FIVE hundred thousand acres OF public lands
granted ihs~ State, among the several counties,
sharefand share bike. | had serious objections
to this bill and found much difficulty ia giving it
s my sanction; but looking at the measure as one
] only less expedient than another which might
y have been adopted on the same subject, and being
satisfied that large majority Of both branches OF
the Legislature were in favor OF the bill, and not
being satisfied that the veto power should be ex.
eBded to such case, although it amounted to lit
tie more than the mere delay OF measure, a
over the veto it was finally approved.
Since the adjournmentof the Legislature have
been induced to examine this subject more atten.
lively; and, although | would prefer different
disposition OF the fund, and would now recon.
: mend repeal Of the distribution law, yet | am
: less dissatisfied with the measure than was at
, the time OF its adoption. 1t carries out fully the
intention Of the grant, the lands being both
granted and distributed for purposes Of internal
, Improvements. The roads. BRIDGES causeways,
levies, entertainments and other works which may
II, be constructed by the counties, may benefit more
people, and may give additional value to more
public lands, and more Of that value, and may
Y bring more public lands into market, than the
, application OF the five hundred thousand acres to
r any one, Two or three OF our large rivers, where
nature has already done much for the country,
and where the best OF the public lands have al.
ready been Sold 1t is not uncommon, however,
n for that country which has been favored with a
good navigable stream, to think itself entitled to
the public funds 10 improve that stream, while
:, the country which is destitute Of any navigation
u is denied even the means Of bridging and impro.
:, wing the common roads,
1t has been urged that the counties would not
make the best application Of this fund. lift were
certain that they would do so, then that should be
conclusive argument in favor OF the distribution
law, because it is very certain the State will
j. never make proper application OF it. Public
d funds are seldom properly applied either by
! States or the United States. They are funds to
u be wasted This has been proven by almost all
experience.
If the Legislature should repeal the distribution
l. law, then the proceeds OF the lands could be ap
\, piled 10 The improvement Of the Usage, Grand
;, White and the Current rivers, and the southern
u" swamps, in such manner as 10 be Of much ser
g vice to the several sections Of country in which
r. the money is applied. No extensive improve
ment, however, Of permanent character, could
: be made with so small sum divided between SC