Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1857-06-16


the interest added. 2
Wouldit be just / ask = State. lust horn. or To
a Territory yet IN its nEmal condition. without
roads, without public bnif lngs, without commerce.
and sparsey settled, that It's lands should be dealt
out literally 70 older States, and it left to wither
and perish by the withdrawal Of its life-blood p
when, under such policy, would il be settled and
ready to pay its taxes to the General Government,
thus partially relieving US from a portion of our
burdens Would not this be suicidal operation
even to the old States, and keep up with the new
States an irritating feud that time itself might never
heal?
There is another consideration. too. attending any
distribution Of the proceeds of the public lands,
that may render the attemPs dangerous, and would
certainly prevent the passage Of the Bill If the
Free Sellers in Congress found that there was any
possibility Of passing such bill would they not Of
fer proviso that this distribution should be made
on the basis Of sOhits population alone and where
could the South find any assistance to prevent such
an amendment from being passed? She could not
appeal to Northern Democrats ESPECIALLY from the
new States Of the West and say them, first vote
against your principles in voting for distribution at
all, and then, further, vote to protect the South
against the interests Of your constituents. This
would be asking more than was ever sought to be
gained from any body Of Representatives, and would
most assuredy be refused Could the "Americans''
then call on their own friends from the North in
Congress TO sustain them against this aggressive
u the FREE CulltfS surely not, lOf the
very good reasons that they are not in Congress to
be called upon, and if they we're, would equally re-
fuse. The result, them viii probably be- thatifthe
&" Americans could get distribution bill through
Congress, it would be the basis of Chite popula-
ton, and then the South would get comparatively
little by the result and her whole people would be
inaamed again, from Virginia to Texas with this
new Northern outrage. We are told very often by
cur opponents, that Democrats perpetually keep up
lmhammatory feelings on the subject OF slavery, in
order to preserve their power But they are
opening voluntarily new field for dispute, when
they have no power, except in State Of the Uni
on, to protect the South when the contest shall have
commenced
The idea Of Distribution, however, is humbug at
best. IL Is not seriously thought Of or maintained
in but few States Of the Union, and the Democratic
and Republican parties are both opposed to IT, and
If it was sueeessfulin every State where the subject
Is canYassed it could nOtreceive more than 40 votes
in Congress, and would be abandoned the moment
it had elected those who favored the policy. The
golden visions held out by our opponents to Ten
nessee from Distribution are just about real in
their probable fUlflment as the allurements held
out by Lottery Agents to their yictms-One chance
against thirty thousand is just about the hope for
distribution.
The great objection, however, to distribution is
its unconstitutiOnaity and the dangers that would
result to our country from the system of making the
Federal Government a Receiving Agent to distribute
money amongst the States.
Mr.. Calhoun, in 1884 although in favor of distri-
button at that time, admitted its uneOnstutiOnality
and proposed to amend our constitution in order to
have it done; but fearful was he of the dangers
likely to arise from such system that he further
proposed to limit its operation to eight gears and
then abandon Il forever Whats commentary on dis
tribution are such views and action from so able
and powerful an ADVOCATED They carry conviction Of
its impOlcy on their very face.
Why however, is distribution unconstitutional?
Simply because the public domain, whether ceded
to the Union by the State or ACQUIRED bv treaty is
held as fund to be used for the common benefit of
the whole country, and not to be distributed and
squandered by individual States. Congress is con-
sttuted the trustee under the law to control and
age this fund for the interest Of all who may be
interested IN its proper management, and Congress
can more abandon this trust and distribute the
money than could trustee for women and children
hand over property cOnfded to his management and
then say he denuded Of the trust and no longer
responsible for the funds. This principle is plain,
and acted upon in all the relations in life throughout
the Union, and therefore easily to be appreciated.
It may be asked is this trusteeship never to cease
even when the original purpose Of the trust may be
fulfilled? IansWer that when the Union ceases and
the trustee no longer remains and there gen
eral objects be fulfilled then if any funds remain
on hand, Of course they ought to be distributed;-
but whilst We are one people and have one common
Legislature that body ought to specify the objects
are to be applied, and should not suffer the means
to pass from their control in the hands Of persons
who are not responsible for them.
This idea Of the lncOnstitutiOnalty Of distribu-
ton was admitted on the face Of the bill for distr
button which formerly passed Congress, for 1t was
expressly provided in that bill that the funds should
be returned if demarided by Congress. This provi-
sion simply made it a loan Of money to the State by
the Federal Government.
Independent, howfver, of this objection, there
remains the impolics of making the General Gov
eminent receiver oSmoney for distribution amongst
the States. If OH undertake to make the States
pensioners on the ltunty of the Government, even
though we may stoIJly call it receiving our own
money, we shall q find that instead of paying
their debts and hu fanding the means, the States
will incur heavier possibilities and enter on wider
fields Of expenditure looking to the General Gov
eminent as an EI 4 trado whose resources are ex-
haustless When, 9n, the means properly arising
from the public dOI gin are expended and no more
can be CLEANED frOl that teat, they will turn with
longing eyes to the $her and more common sources
OF revenue for prCStion in the day of their dis
tress. Like persOssc who receive the proceeds Of
a lottery ticket ",.Inexpected legacy and squan-
der 1t away suddeNE relying similar Windtalls
for the future, this tes would then never be CON
tent to fall back n direct, grinding taxation on
their own citizens = ne enquiry would Immediately
arise, who sufferer ast from high tariff and if
majority Of the STATE should come to the conclusion
that this the s@sst mode of taxation for their
citizens it would nexorably resorted to, however
dangerous the result We should have to face the
question directly ehnsher the General Government
should collect more for purposes of distribution
l might remark 5rther that the expenses of our
whole Indian Dep" 4met are properly chargeable to
the landed sales, asmuch as the lands were pro
cured to a great extent from the Indians and the
moneys paid to them for their lands, and the annu-
tiles paid to them in their new homes are therefore
proper deduction from any sales made of their |
lands