New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-07-13

We have exposed hitherto, at considerable length,
the gross historical Misrepresentation to be found
in the opinions Of some Of the Judges in the bred
Scott case on the political and social status of me-
groes at the time of the Declaration Of indie
pendence and the adoption Of the Federal OOnst-
tuition. But, upon the important subject of the
acquisition by the United States of the territory
northwest of the Ohio, the misrepresentation in
dulged in in that by certain Of the slavehOding
Judges are not less conspicuous.
Chief Justice fancy, in his handling of this
topic, begins by dwelling at some length upon the
claim put in during the war of the Revolution by
Mar, land and some Of the other States which, ss
he incorrectly explains it, had no unsettled land
meaning thereby no claims of lands in the far
unOccupied West-to be admitted to a joint par.
ticipaton in all territory Of that description which
Great Britain, by the common purse and common
sword, might be compelled to cede. He then pro-
ceeds to give the following account of the way in
which the territory northwest of the Ohio came
into possession Of the United States:
"But these difficulties became much more serious
after mace took place and the boundaries OF the United
States were established. Every State, at that time,
felt severely the pressure of its debt but in Vr
gina and other States, there large terrific
Ties Of unsettled ands the sale Of which would enable
them 10 discharge their obligations without much in
convenience while other States, which had such
resource, saw before them many years Of heavy and
burdensome taxation and the latter insisted for the
reasons before state that these unsettled lands should
be treated as the common property Of the States and
the proceeds applied TO their common benefit.
1.-THE letters from the statesmen of that day will
show how much this controversy occupied their
thoughts and the dangers that were apprehended from
it, II the disturbing element Of The time, and
wcrc entertained that AZ might disscre The Confederd.
tion Ly xhick the States Uere then united.
"1Lese fears and dangers were, however, at once
removed when the State Of Virginia, an 1884, r0ian
tayy coded 10 the United States the immense tract Of
country lying northwest Of the river Ohio and which
only olect Of tke State in making this cession was to
put al end TO The threatening and exciting controversy
and 10 enable the Congress OF that time to dispose OF
the lands, and appropriate the proceeds As common
fund for the benefit Of the States 1t was Lot
ceded because il inconvenent to the State to hold
and govern it, from any expectation that 1t could
be better or conveniently governed by the United
States"
A brief account of the true history of the vir
ginia Ct ssiCn will chow the utter fal.ity Of this
whole statement, from beginning to end
To begin with the assertion that 1.-The immense
"trsct Of country lying northwest of the River
"Obio' was in 1854, or at any other time, with
" in the acknowledged limits Of the State Of Vir-
gina" This assertion is utterly and totally
false. Virginia, it is true, did pretend to set up
such claim, but il was never admitted BY any
body out Of the limits Of that State. Down to the
year 1868, all this country had been in the exclu
sve possession Of Indians, acknowledging no ale
glance to Grea. Britain. and cf the French, who