Washington sentinel., 1854-06-23

for the "general welfare of all the States, shall
not be prejndiced, nor the rights of any separate
State prejudiced by such disposal does not
confer upon il the same benefits which are thus
derived by the other States of the Union. One
thing is certain, that North Carolina and Georgia
which States ceded their vacant lands after the
adoption of the Constitution, never would have
ceded them, had the construction which has since
been given 10 the third section (which construc-
ton makes the power of Congress over the public
lands absolutely then obtained; for Mr. Madison,
who was the ruling spirit of the convention, has
declared that in all the various amendments
proposed by the States before the ratification of
The Constitution, and after every one OF them pro-
posed 10 limit, and not extend, the powers of the
general government
But il may be said that this argument, even if
just, does not apply 10 territory acquired by pur
chase conquest. Ii occurs 10 me that il applies
with as much force in one instance as the other
What IS the general government but the agent
of the States of the Unions With whose money
has territory been purchased, if not with the
money of the States BY whom has the conquest
OF territory been made, II not by the brave hearts
and sturdy of the citizens Of all The States?
Why, then, a difference of tenure, or more un-
limited power by the general government over
territory bought or conquered Where can you
better repair for instructions 10 the powers OF
Congress over the public lands, acquired in any
manner than to the deeds of cession, made at or
about the time Of the adoption Of the CONSTITUTIONS
It's fathera Now, sir, the only plausible argu-
ment-I say plausible, because il is more specious
than correct-which has ever been adduced in
support of the constiutionary OF the acts OF
Congress, whereby part of the common terri
tory which this government as a trustee holds
''for The common benefit of all the States,n has
been given TO individual States, or TO incorporated
companies, Is, that The reserved sections, at the
price of So SO per acre, will bring as much money
into the common treasury and at early day,
.l... ..~Ex -. e
if the whole were sold at 81 25 per acre. Even
if this was the fact, / cannot perceive how il
affects The constitutional question.
The argument is based on the assumption that
the general government Is the proprietor OF the
public lands, and that in the character Of pru-
dent proprietor, has the right, and that il is its
duty 10 adopt any measure in regard to iis domain
which will facilitate the sale of its surplus lands,
and bring into the treasury the precise amount
OF money that would have been realized had all
the lands been sold at the price prescribed by law.
II seems TO me that here is correct conclusion
deduced from false premises. The government
is not a.proprietor, but trustee, holding lands for
the States which created it Proprietorship i'm
Plies absolute control--a fee-simple title; and If
The government is the proprietor of the public
lands, It's power over them and over the money
proceeding from their sales is unlimited and it
may donate either land or money TO State, a cor
poration, individual But as a trustee, with
a power over the public lands and their proceeds
ers, and 10 the carrying them into operation, these
dangers and abuses are avoided, and the rights
and interests of all the States preserved. In the
| language ofa senator from Virginia, Mr. HUNTER,
the daily beauty of whose life adorns intellectual
endowment and scholarly attanments which re-
mind us of the vigor of Jefferson and the accom-
plishments of Writ, "give this construction, and
you make the whole system of the Constitution
harmonious; you bring two provisions into
conflict Give il any other construction, and you
destroy one part AT the expense Of the other"
A prudent trustee, however, may exercise
wise discretion in the management OF an estate,
well proprietor; and so far as The applica-
lion of the power in the bill under consideration is
concerned, it is not material 10 my views in what
character we may regard the general government
II is not necessary TO my purpose 10 show that the
argument in reference 10 the appreciation of the
value Of the reserved sections uniformly falla-
cious but, one of the appointed trustees ofthe
States OF this Union, holding properly of which the
States are the real owners, and which il is ncum-
bent upon me, in part to manage for their com
mon good, it becomes proper that | should show,
by statements taken from the reports Of the Com
nssioners OF the Land Office, that an increase OF
The sales o. the public lands is not always thus
effected; and that, moreover, il is sometimes
oosing speculation. In The year 1896, was sold of
the public lands, twenty million seventy -four hous
and eight hundred and seventy-one acres.