The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1849-07-25

noticing this most weighty matter, we
have taken little time to look into the
state of the case, which, as a matter OF
course, is, in all its parts, greatly peryert-
ed in the article referred to. We find,
however, that in 1880, before Mr.. EWING
came into the Senate, an act was passed
providing that ''the officers and soldiers,
sailors and marines, who were entitled to
military land bounties by the laws and re-
solutions Of Virginia, their heirs" &c.,
should, at any time before the first day of
January, 1885, be authorized to surrender
to the Secretary of the Treasury Of the
United States their warrants, and receive
certificates of scrip for the amount--but
the act contained proviso, that the guam
tity should not exceed $4,000 acres of
land in addition to 100000 already appro-
priated.
This act made the United States the
debtor-it settled the principle that all Of
the officers, soldiers, &c., who filed their
warrants with the Secretary of the Trea-
sury before January l, 1885, should be
paid the amount in land scrip. But the
quantity Of land designated being too small
to pay the debt assumed, it became neces-
sary to increase il and this was done by
subsequent laws, passed while Mr.. EWING
was in the Senate, and for which he voted,
either silently or upon the yeas and nays.
We are not aware that the correctness of
this vote has ever been questioned. The
principle being once established that the
United States was the debtor--that all
who presented their claims prior to given
day should be paid, it could not, we think,
be questioned that the means should be
provided for payment of alas well
those who were poor and ignorant, and
therefore tardy in presenting their claims,
as the active and vigilant, who were in
early, and therefore satisfied out of the
first appropriation. The vote, then, was
right-it was necessary to maintain the
good faith Of the nation-it was simply an
appropriation to pay an acknowledged
debt. What, then, does the Union COM
plain Off Why, that Mr.. EWING, having
voted for an appropriation to carry out the
law of 1880, afterwards purchased some
of the scrip that was issued under that
law.
Now, in the school of ethics in which we
were taught, the right to make such pur-
chase could not even be considered doubt
full. 1t was right, morally and politically,
even if Mr.. EWING had been in the Senate
and voted for the law of 1890; for we
know of no principle any where which ex
cludes the legislator from an equal partici-
patton with all other citizens in the bene-
fits of laws which he has aided in enacting.
For example, the Senator who votes for
the survey and sale of the public lands,
has the same right with all other citizens
to purchase at the sale. Ifhe vote for the
improvement of our rivers and harbors, or
in any other way for the protection of our
commerce or navigation, he has right to
adventure as merchant, or be passen-
ger on board of steamboat, and in either
or both those capacities seek security in
the harbor, and thus take his share of the
benefits extended by the law which he
helped to enact. Or, if he vote for laws to
protect life, and property, and character,
and for the organization of courts of JUS
tice to enforce them, he has still the same
right with all his fellow-citizens to live, to
acquire property, to establish and main
tain character; and he has right to go
into the very courts thus created by his
vote and avail himself of their protection.
But the Union says that Mr. EWING, when
charged with it in Ohio, denied that he
was the purchaser of land scrip.
This is, as a matter of course, false.
Mr.. EWING could not have been the pur-
chaser of land scrip, to large amount,
without its being publicly known in Ohio
and the other States in which there were
public lands for sale; and the very fact
that he received the assignments in bis
own name shows that he made no secret
of his acts. Indeed, we happen to have
other evidence on this subject, in our
opinion quite satisfactory-namely, card
published in the Ohio papers, over Mr..
EwrNG's own signature, which shows very
clearly what he admitted and what he de-
MED. The charge then and there made
by our contemporaries predecessor, the