Weekly national intelligencer., 1851-02-01

.re the principal conditions annexed TO this grant, and
10 be assened and established by the acon OF ne
ee;sl.tures which the bill declares shall be compact De-
tween the Government Of the United States ana the o'ae
Governments Il provides, however, that, upon 'ne enact
ment Of such law, the title to the land sna ves'
in the State, and copies OF the title papers soa %
over and thercupon all of Congress inconsistent with
or repupnan TO this shall be rePeaed and all right e
and interest Of the United States TO and in the said lands shall
cease and the same shall vest in such state.
Il must be observed BY every one upon casual view OF
nj, ,,a, that the provisions which have narrated, brief
thay are involve some the most important considerations
in reference TO the of the lands Of this country They
present question the power o the General Government
10 limit the free action Of the States by annexag such cond
ons 10 the tenure and transfer Of land within their limits
and 10 control future legislation by present Legislative stpu
a,ions We have stipulation in all the States be-
eye that they shall interfere with the primary disposal
of the pubc lands by the Uned States and this is also the
snrt Of the constitution When the lands once disposed
Of by the General Government they afterwards evertor
cheh upon the failure of heirs from any other cause,
they revert the State, and not to the Government of the
United States. There power authority in the Gene
raj Government which enables reclaim the lands situated
in any Of the States after they have been conveyed
the independent jurisdiction Of the State the subject for
bids it, At early day in the colonial history OF Massachu
se the question presented whether upon failure OF
heirs the land should the British Government
the waers should become the properly Of the colony
and the principle recognised and concorred n that the
home Government denomuaod, could not take the
land but that vested in and became the property OF the
that the lands shall be exempt from execution, levy, focd
SALE one which involves the question Of right the part
of the General Government to interfere with the Legislative
action Of the States upon this subject know that the bill
does not purport interfere directly and positively with the
action Of the State Legislatures il woub be too absurd for
any man to contend that the General Government had the
power by enactment to determine what should should not
be taken upon execution vy or forced sae or what should
be the law of distribution, the law of tenure in State
This bill does purpor do that directly, and in many
words but it condition to the grant that there
shall be legislation of specified character in reference this
subject which shall be irePsalable II seems to that
principle Of this kind totally inconsistent with the relations
existing between the two Governments What is the power
of the United States the disposition of the public domain
lying within the States II is the power understand it
to make the primary disposition Of that public land by convey
After that can again come back, except by pur
chase into the hands Of the United States five may go
ash proposed n bo determine what lands shall shall
not be taken execution by evy and to prohibit sale
under order Of court Of chancery directing -why may
not further Why aot undertake. through the
Of such conditions control and mould the general legs
aton Of the State Courts Of special jurisdiction have
times been established with exclusive power to decide
arising among the occupants of certain land the special urs
dictons of the favortsm of monarchy May
que the establishment of such courts by these conditions
May Legislative action thus form and control the judiciary
{ Statel
The power Of the State supreme and perfect private
domain required for public purposes under the general pn
cples Of law recognised throughout the county The
sion upon which may be taken and the Of
tanning its value and making determined
by State authorities Ought the General Government TO in
legislation the subject shall bel If in these instances it
may be done there subject within the power Of State
legislation that we may not seek thus to control.
There is subject upon which legislation by the States is
usually and Of right should be- unshackled than upon
the enforcing Of contracts the collection Of debts and the
transfer of property, both personal and real True policy
may render expedent expose real forced sale
one time and not at another 1t may be expedien subject
breach of contract The requirements of public interest in
reference to the whole subject should be left for the decision
of the State authorities But this bill aboshes all discretion
upon the subject by withdrawing the property from such
legislative action forever At
In respects this indirect method Of controlling egs-
ave action in the States is Objectionable than direct
legislation on the subject by Congress- Required by the
dion to the grant, the legislation Of the State is to become
rePeaiable 1t is the beauty Of popular Government that
the laws made to conform the present condition
thiHgs and may be modified when expedien Under this
system, however, whatever change long experience might
suggest or public interest require it should not be effected if
IN derogaon OF this condition The legislature curtaed in
its power Of action, would be pointed to these old conditions
for the limit of their authority By their TERMS too they
would TO defy control by the provisions of State
constitution, establishing certain rights and powers within the
limits Of the State which may afterwards be changed with
out the consent of Congress. Hgu
will not here discuss the effect of collision Of interests
growing out Of these conditions My object is accomplished
when show that Is kind of legislation complicated its
States While our hands clear Of it let US avoid such
restrictive interference with their action. Let us not comp-
cate the relations between us, lay foundation for diff
cultes to be settled hereafter.
II we adopt the new system which is here proposed,
shall then have in the States kinds of enureone
Of them free and unconditional under the grants already
made and the other Of the limited and conditional character
defined in this bill. E. ay%
This difference in the manner in which property will be
held must naturally lead to much confusion have here
statement OF the quantity of lands in the several States
which each of the two tenures would apply.
Thus, in Florida, 3,3s3 730 would be subject this
anomalous tenure, while little four millions would be
held BY unconditional titles In Iowa. twenty eight millions
would be subject to the conditions and little over four mil
lions would be exempt from them In Michigan they would
attach TO the title Of twenty-five millions while eleven mil
lions would be held under present titles In Wisconsin,
twensy-seven millions would be subject o the conditions
while seven millions would be held by unconditional grant,
These examples sufficient show how the two kinds of
tenure would extend through the States and be applied to
lands intermnged and lying side by side.
these conditions also limit the conveyance and descent of
real estate As only persons with specified qualifications can
ase OF nod land rules and regulations be adopted and
ohcers appointed in order determine who have the requ
He quanncalons Constant failures in the conditions and
consequent reVeon OF the title to the land granted
state in unavoidable and complicated questions
OF right under the conditions.
have BOXED over this bill for the purpose Of determining
10 my own mind as to the precise condition of the title and
OF the effed OF failure in the performance Of the condition
BY which ne titles the individual settler should be forfeited
the land should fall into the possession of persons not qua
h6ed unde the law TO hold it. will revert to the State or
become agdn the property Of the United States by the
transfer OF ne title to the State, under this BILL the General