The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-06-04

| thsif tespectfve limits, bn just and squitabls
conditions The Senate will recollect that the
debate on that measure terminated unexpectedly,
and without aftording me an opportunity OF an
swering the objections against it.. AS there will
probably be no other opportunity OF meeting
them, trust it will be sufficient apology for
doing on this occasion.
begin with what, TO me, would be the most
formidable objection--that under the garb Of q
cession, the measure is, in fact, but mode OF
distribution ] reply, as on former occasion,
Prove it, and shall renounce it at once, and for
ever But ! cannot take assertion for proof,
however boldly made. Until it is proved, shall
regard the charge cf distribution, coming as it
does from the open advocates of that measure,
~ originating in a conscious feeling that far
from being popular, the scheme has no hold on
the affections of the people. lftbey believed it
to be popular, those who SO warmly oppose ces-
sion wolsi be the last to call it distribution.
1t is next objected that it is gift Of the lands
to the rew States Be it 80. Iwould infinite.
ly rather make gift of the whole than to adopt
the fatal policy Of distribution and, if it should
be necessary to defeat it, would regard sur
render of the whole as cheap sacrifice. go
farther, and hold that if the lands, instend of
being regarded the property of the Union,
should be regarded rs the property of the States
separately, the new States would have the best
right to the portion within their limits. They
possess, unquestionably, the eminent domain,
which would have carried with it the property
in the public lands within their borders respec-
lively, had they not surrendered it by special
agreement on their admission into the Union
But that agreement was with the United States,
and the surrender of the property in the lands
was to them and it may be fairly questioned
how far the agreement, on their admission, would
be binding on them should the revenue from
the lands be perverted from the use Of the
United States to that of the States separately,
as is proposed by this scheme of distribution
But is the cession gift? Does it propose
surrender Of the land for nothing? Is IS per
cent. of the gross proceeds to be paid into the
treasury nothing! Is it nothing to put an end
to the angry and agitating debates which we
witness session after session, constantly increas-
ing in violence? Nothing to save the time, and
labor, and expense of Congress? Nothing to
curta one fourth Of the patronage of the gov
eminent, and that Of the most dangerous cha
racter? Nothing to raise the new States to
level with the old? Nothing to remove this great
disturbing cause which 80 injurously influences
our legislation? Is it nothing, finally, to substi-
tute system in lieu of the present, rs far us the
lands lying within the new States are concerned,
which, in addition to all these considerations,
proposes the only practical method of preventing
the loss of the lands, and hch, 80 far from
pecuniary loss, will bring more into the treasury
than the present system boldly assert that
such would be the case as may well do now,
AZ no one opposed to the measure has ventured
to question the correctness Of the calculation,
or the data on which it rests