Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1852-05-06
A Home for Every Man.

w udt Tue ldte vi IIIlo ull1 VIII NC, NC \
are unable to foretell. Its friends
say it will finally pass. This We trust
will be the case. The fear Of sub
jecting ourselves to the hair-splitting
criticisms Of the overly-tenaeious for
consistency, is not sufficient to pre-
vent US from favoF ring and urging
Congress to enact such law as we
understand the bill before them would
constitute, if passed;-to give every
landiess man in the United States a
home. Our opposition to the Home
stead Exemption Law, passed by our
last Legislature, has nothing to do
with the propriety and consistency Of
our earnest desire to have Congress
grant to the homeless a home. We
assert this, without reason or where
fore-conceiving it waste of time
to do so. However, it would seem
10 us, that mere statement of some
of the reasons going to show the i'm
portance of Congress making this
sort Of disposition of the public do
IInain, will relieve US of all seeming
Iinconsiste ncy upon the subject of a
Homestead Exemption.
To dispose Of the public lands as
heretofore, will, with the other ordi-
nary sou rces Of revenue, create a
surplus in the United States treasury.
1 t is believes the receipts from i'm
ports, hereafter, will exceed annually
the demah Ids of the government. If
this be true, Of which there is but
little dou BIT, revenue from the public
lands is 5 uperauous, ev en- dangerous,
by creating surplus to tempt Con
gress to engage in legislation of
doubtful constitutionaity. The
rights of the States, and the pre-
kcribed Ii mits assigned the Federal
Governm ent, might be trampled upon
by the pdwer created by an excess in
the treas ury. No one doubts but
that mon ley is power, and can be used
as the most potent engine to under
mine the rights Of the States.
There being no use, and it not even
being practicable, to dispose of the
public do main as heretofore, we con.
eeive tina Congress could not do bet
ter than to donate it to actual set
tlers in s. litable parcels, upon certain
4 qui table principl es. Presenting
these to have been provided for by
the bill low before Congress, we! vii
not undertake to specify, farther thar
that it should guard against specula
tions upo IA the charity and bounty o
the goveri nment.
We arc fully impressed with the
belief that the adoption Of such ;
policy by Congress, would not only
efince pommendabIe liberality, but
give a pei maneEt home to every man
now stltute, as far as its action il
capable. This isall we have any dis
position TO have Congress do; not
understanding after this has been done
there will be many meritorious citi
Gems not in condition to avail them
selves of the gratuity Of government
We are aware that there are hun
. dreds and thousands so destitute a.
I'd be unable to remove their familie,
To within reach of the desired haver
i many without the necessary stock
implements, and means of subsist
ence, to enable them to enjoy The
bounty Of our government. Anc
this we " ry much regret. Never
tBeless, v e would have Congress pass
the bill. There is an innumerable
host Of meritorious citizens who are
now unable to provide themselves
with no me for want of just the as
sis stance " e contemplate by the pas
sage of the bill under consideration.
The cost Of land at government pri-
ces, We K now is moderate enough,
if sold at all, yet, with the limited
means of many, it is beyond their
reach. We are for relieving them,
to the extent of the pittance pro-