Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1853-07-29
r1r. Douglas and Distribution.

We have searched over the Debates in the Senate
of the United States, on the 10th of August, 1852
on the Bill for the construction of Ship
Canal round the Falls of st. Mary, and in
deed all the debates upon that or similar sub
iects; and after such search and examination, we
assert most fully and positively that there is not
one word uttered by MIR. Douglas, then after
wards at variance in the slightest degree with his
position as indicated in the extract given by from
his speech on the Iowa Land Bill, on the 22d Janua
ry of the same year. Neither is there word from
Mr. Cass, or any other recognised Democratic lead
er, giving any sanction whatever to this new-fang-
led substitute for the defeated and repudiated poll
cy of the distribution of the proceeds of the public
lands, formerly urged by Mr.. Clay.
If the Editor of the Wilmington Herald chooses to
look over the debates upon these subjects, he will be
convinced that our political history is true to the
letter We have the records and have taken the
trouble to examine them fully.
We have heard it pretty generally admitted, at
least by all making any claims to Democracy, that
the policy of retaining the national domain as ma
tonal property and to be applied 10 purposes strict
| ly national in their character is the most proper
course, and the one which they would like to see
pursued, if it only practicable but they con-
tend that it is not so-that the rapacity of the land
States is so great that they will swallow it all up in
spite of u.s. and that only chance to get anything
at all is to take hand in the general scramble anc
grab for what we can catch Now permit us L
say that this reasoning is faaoious from the first
simply because it is in direct contradiction to tn
facts upon which it purports to be founded. TIL
disposal of the public land rests wholly with tn
representatives of the non land States, who ounum
Der those from the land States more than two t.
one. IT, them representatives only true t
: themselves, what is to prevent proper use bein
= made Of the public domain-the land States are to
weak to take it.. They will never be any stronger
but on the contrary, their relative strength wi
l. diminish Ohio, Illinois and Indiana rapid
l. passing out Of the category of land States, nearl
$ all the public lands lying therein having been q
ready sold otherwise disposed Of and the alterna
Is sections either side of the Illinois Central Raj
road going off rapidly at their enhanced valu
% In the nature of things, it is next to impossib
that the lani States should advance in compa
y alive strength on the floor of either House, but
the contrary it is certain that they will retrograd
e and instead of being out-numbered only two to OF
at present, the disparity will be still greater pc
10 haps as much as three or four to one against Il
~ land States. Why, then, is it necessary to for
- this question with indecency to An immediate sol
" ton. The older States have the matter all in the
" own hands, and can do they please at their lei
- ure. Too much has, perhaps, been conceded 10 tt
States in which the lands lie but certain, it is, tn
if such has been the case to some extent under Il
old system, the remedy proposed is much worse th'
the disease, if we are to take Benefits Bill al
indication of the practical workings of the distrib
tie 49, 80. ~, -, ,- !.
its principles totally out of the questie
er The scare and furry attempted to be gotten up
to this distribution question, is about sensible
I'D would be to tell majority oftwenty that they
Z make haste and get the best terms they can from
minority of ten lest if they don't fix it that way
err ten may outvote the twenty, and take all the
yes mon property from them!