Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1854-07-19

in the act the stipulation that they would not assert
right the proprietors and possessors OF the en-
iment domain that they would not claim the Zee
simple and universal ownership of these lands with
/ in their limits.
But waving that right, there is another question
| which would advise gentlemen of the old States
not to raise / allude to the right of the States to
tex all lands within their limits whether possessed
and owned by the Government possessed and
owned by individuals. The General Government
seems to have concede8it. Congress conceded it by
the terms and stipulatons of its ACTS Look at the
cases which have been brought before your judicial
tribunals. In the celebrated case of McCulloch-l
speak from memory, for l have not looked at the
case for long time-the decision OF the court was,
that the taxing power of the State could not be
erted because the bank part of the functions of
the Federal Government and necessary to its vital-
ty necessary to the execution of its powers That
is the essence of these bank cases.
But the case becomes entirely different one
when relates to the question of taxing real estate,
that which, in the abstract is not at all necessary to
the execution of the powers of the Government;
and hence you find, in the tax cases which have
arisen within the last few years. in the Philadelphia
case and in the New England cases, where the States
undertook to levy taxes on the real estate OF the
United States though the circuit courts did decide
in favor of the General Government. they carefully
RECOGNIZED the distinction of which l have spoken,
leaving the inference clear and irresistible that If
the real of that character that it was not
essential to the execution of the functions OF the
Government that then the taxing power OF the local
authorities might be eXerted without let hndrance,
or question on the part of the authorities of the
United States Certain it is that though the circuit
court in those cases, did give decisions adverse to
the local authorities, and though the cases were
taken I'D to the Supreme Court they had disappear
ed and the Government has been quite content to
compromise with the authorities
Since those cases have arisen, you will lind that
in all our legislation we have been careful to insert
a provision that in the purchase of any property in
a State, the Legislature of said State shall express
ly by act relinqush all right and authority to tax
IL j. ha6 IN
so far as we can gather it from the dicta of the
courts ; so far as we gather it from the settle
ment of the cases to which have referred, and from
the subsequent legislation of Congress itself in re-
aton to these matters the right of the States to tax
the real estate of the Government within their limits
where such real estate is not absolutely and essen
TALLY necessary to the execution OF the functions
of the Government, is almost conceded. Is 1T by
any means clear that State surrender in per-
petuity her power tax? If she can, must not the
consideration be at least ample? In this case the
consideration is of comparatively little value. But
above ALL the contract made under circumstances
which will Justify its enforcement? Congress posses
sed the power to refuse to the States admission
into the Union and in this position Congress declined
until the State would agree to the dictated
terms. AS between individuals, would not an agree
ment of the sort fail to be enforced by the courts
because of the want of equality of option between
the parties? Would it not be held to be coercire9
The studied language of some of the acts seem to |
indicate that Congress has apprehended such con- |
struction. For their free acceptance or rejection
are the words in some cases. But have no time to
dwell upon the point though, in view of the facts,
1t may be we'll for the Government that the question
is never raised and brought to decision. 1t may be
well for the older States of the Union that they have
never pressed the point to a hearing.
Now, do not propose to go into an investigation
and comparison of the benefits which have been con-
ferred by the General Government the respective
portions of this Union but confess that 1
amazed when hear gentlemen from the older States
Of the Union get up here and talk about all the pub
dc no Statnc Nyhi fha O1Io
States get no share of them. Let US look for
the distribution of the favors of this Govern
nent l except, from the remarks which am about
o submit, the question of ce-hoding leave all
hat out.
In the first place. from the necessity of things,
nearly all the annual revenue of our Government is
expended in the older States of the Union. Out of
bout one thousand millions of dollars collected and
,aid into the Treasury since this Government has
xisted more than nine hundred millions have been
expended within the limits of the old States of this
Jonfederacy, and that has been so from necessity.
But still there stands the fact and if the States
we're disposed to be captous about the matter, and
20 into an examination of the distribution of the ia
ors of the Government, they might well point you
this. and ask you to consider it while making out
he calculation. There arc all the expenditures for
he Government in the District of Columbia There
re the appropriations for the building and support
# the Navy which always have been, and always
rill be- expended within the limits of the old States
# the Union. There the appropriations for the
quipment and clothing of your Army. There are
for the Coast Survey, for your Gus
om-house establishments for your minis, which
must be nearly all expended within the limits of the
lder States. And SO might go and enumcrate;
ut they all stand upon the records, and whoever
xamines them understand them in detail.
There stands upon that record the fact, that nine
oars out of every ten collected out of the people
the United States have been expended by the ,
government within the limits of the old States of
ne Union. Under this state of facts, why will gen
emen talk about the undue liberality which has
manifested towards the States of the Union?
tut few years since law passed to relieve q
our railroads from the duty imposed upon railroad
on. These duties imposed upon iron in the aggre-
ate, were Sc, 10000 ST. 000 900; every dollar of
hch Injured to the benefit of the old States of the
MON and which can be viewed in other light /
direct bonus for the benefit of railroads in
he old States of the Union. What would gentle t
ZEN of the old States say here to-day Tomorrow
proposition was introduced to make a direct L
it to the railroads of the West, without returning
ny pecuniary consideration for it into the Treasury
the United States? And yet, when the West 5
'me here and ask you to make grants of land for S
lie construction of railroads, upon terms which COM
snsate you for the grants, and the value of which
ou get Immediately and directly back in the en- S
ancement of the value of the lands adjacent these
ads, it operates upon some very much as the sight
water does upon of hydrophoba. 1t pro- t.
ices spasms at once, and they fly into the most vi
ent opposition. il
When you made remission of duty upon railroad II
on, it was clear gift without any pretext of a s
cuniary return to the Government. But when Il
opositions have been brought before this House "
donations of public lands, for the construction of