The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1854-05-19

| tain enumerated objects only, and leaves TO the
several States reslduary and nvolabie sovereign
ty over all other objecls.
In the same spirit President Jefferson invokes
"the supper: Of The State governments in all their
rights as the most competent administrations for
our domestic concerns, and the Surest bulwark
against anrepubcan tendencies;' - and President
Jackson said that our true strength and wisdom
not promoted by invasions of the rights and
powers of the several States, but that, on the con-
trary they consist "not in binding the States more
closely 10 the centre, but in leaving each more m.
obstructed in its proper orbit"
The trainers OF the constitution, in refusing TO
confer on the federal government any jurisdiction
over these purely local objects, in my judgment
manifested wise forecast and broad comprehen.
sion OF the true interests of these objects them
selves. 1t is clear that public charities within the
Staesc can be efficiently administered only by their
authority. The bill before comedies this, for
it does not commit the funds provides to the ad-
minisraton Of any other authority.
| cannot but repeat what have before ex-
pressed, that if the several States, many Of which
have rlready laid the foundation of munifcent es.
Establishments of local benefcence, and nearly all
Of which proceeding to establish them, shall
be led 10 suppose, as they will be should this bill
become law, that Congress is TO make provision
for su,h objects, the fountains of charity will be
dried up at home and the several States, instead
Of bestowing their own means on The social wants
of their own people, may themselves, through the
strong temptation, which appeals 10 States as to
individuals, become humble suppllants for the
bounty of the federal government, reversing their
true relation to this Union.
Havlng stated my views of the Limitation OF the
powers conferred by the eighth section of the first
article of the constitution, deem it proper to call
attention 10 the third section Of the fourth article,
nr,d tbo If Tho Siyth article hpar riD
directly upon the question under consideration
which, instead of aiding the claim to power exer-
cised in this case tend is believed, strongly to
illustrate and explain positions which, even without
such support, cannot regard as questionable.
The third section Of the fourth article OF the con-
stuon is in the following terms: "The Congress
shall have power to dispose of and make all need
ful rules and regulations respecting, the territory
or other property belonging to the United States;
and nothing in this constitution shall be so con-
strued as to prejudice any claim of the United
States, or any particular State" The SIKH article
is follows 10 wit, that "All debts contracted and
engagements entered into, before the adoption of
this constitution, shall be as valid against the United
States under this constitution as under the con.
federation"
For correct understanding Of the terms used
in the third section of the fourth article, above
quoted, reference should be had 10 the history of
lnS lIUeS III WHICH tue was IOTIfleu dEu
adopted. 1t was decided upon in Convention on
the l7th September, 1887. and by it Congress
empowered to ''dispose Of" &C., "the territory
other property belonging to the United States"
The only territory then belonging to the United
States that then recently ce6ed by the several
Staes 10 wit: by New York in 1881, by Virginia
in 1884, by Massachusetts in 1885, and by South
Carolina in August, l7s7, only the month before
the formation of the constitution. The cesslon
from Virginia contained the following provision
"That all the lands within the territory SO ceded
20 the United States, and not reserve for or appro-
prated to any of the before mentioned purposes,
disposed OF in bountest the officers md soldiers
ofthe American army, shall be considered com.
mon fund for the use and benefit Of such Of the
United States have become shall become
members of ihe confederation federal alliance
Of the said States, Virginia included, according to
their usual respective propositions, in the general
charge and expenditure, and shall be faithfully and
bona fde disposed Of for that purpose, and for no
other use or purpose whatsoever"
Here the object 70. which these lands are to be
disposed of is clearly set forth, and the power to
dispose of them, granted by the third section of
the fourth article of the constitution, clearly con-
templates such disposition only. II such be the
fact, and in my mind there be no doub, Of il,
then you have again not only no implication in
favor OF the contemplated grant, but the strongest
authority against it.
Furthermore, this bill is in violation Of the faith
of the Government, pledged in the act Of January
%, l847. The 9th section Of that act declares.
"That, for the payment of the stock which may
be created under the provisions Of this act, the
sales of The public lands are hereby pledged and
it IS hereby made the duty of the Secretary of the
Treasury to use and apply all moneys which may
be received into the treasury for the sales Of the
public lands after The first day of January, ls48,
first to pay the interest on all stocks issued by
virtue of this acts and secondly, TO the balance
OF said receipts, after paying the interest aforesaid,
in the purchase of said stocks at their market
value," &c. The debts then contracted have not
been lquidated, and the language Of this section,
and the obligations of the U. States under it, arc
too plain 10 need comment.
have been unable to discover any distinction,
on constitutional grounds, grounds of expedi-
ency, between an appropriation of $40 600, 900
directly from the money in the treasury, for the
object contemplated, and the appropriation of
lands presented for my sanction. And yet, II
cannot doubt that, if the bill proposed ten millions
OF dollars from The treasury of the United States
for the support of INDECENT insane in the several
States, the constitutional question involved in the
act would have attracted forcibIy the attention OF
Congress.
| respectfully submit that, in constitutional
point OF view, it Is wholly immaerial whether The
appropriation be in money or in land.
The public domain is the common property OF
the Union just as much the surplus proceeds Of