Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1857-1858, 1857-05-18
N NASHVILLE:


rated table of the areas of the several new
States, the amount Of lands which have been
sold, and the amount disposed of in donations
for purposes of education, and other purposes
Il is important in the consideration and dis
cussion of this subject, to keep in mind the
facts, embodied In that table. In addition to
what is there shown, bringing the grants and
donations up to the 5Oth of June, 1856, we
will add, that the last Congress made very
large additions to these items, especially in the
way Of grants to the States of Iowa, Florida,
Alabama, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Michigan and
Mississippi, for Railroad purposes. These last
grants were uniformly for alternate sections,
for six miles on each side Of the respective
roads, named in theseveral acts relating to the
subject. We have not the present means Of
knowing the precise amounts Of these grants,
for the reason that they were made for roads
which were particularly named, some located
and some not located, and hence we cannot
know precisely how long they will be. The
aggregate amount, however, has been estima-
ted at from fifteen to t,0enty millions Of acres
which must be added to the aggregate of Mr..
CARLILEs table, to ascertain the present con-
di,iOn of the public lands. And we may safe
" put Down the amount otherwise disposed
of than by sale, at from tao hundred and thir-
ty, to tao hundred and forty millions 81 acres.
Forty millions Of this have been disposed OF
for the beneft of the Indians and for military
services, which leaves about two hundred mil
lions as having been donated to States, individ-
uals and companies. The amount sold falls
somewhat short of one hundred and forty mil
lions If acres; giving an excess Of donations
0Uer sales Of about SIXTY millions Of acres!
which added to the military bounty, an
creases this ercess to one hundred millions.
Throughout the discussion we desire that the
people shall bear these facts constantly in mind.
There are but two objections made by our
opponents, to the disposition which is propos-
ed, Of the public lands. The first is that it is
unconstitutional, the other that it is inerpedi
ent. Whatever other objections may be urged
by way of evasion, will fall under the one or
the other Of these. We shall devote this ar
ticle mainly to q discussion of the first objec-
ton
But before proceeding to this we must draw
distinction between the tenures by which our
public domain is held. Our lands were &C
quired in four ways-1. By deeds Of session
by some of the original thirteen States which
bold 10 ioI 81
British crown; 2. by purchase (both by war
and treaty.; 3, by annexation; and 4, by dis
covery and occupancy. BY the first, we have
the cession of Virginia, of the territory desig-
which have been formed the States of Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin; the
cession by Georgia and South Carolina, of the
territory south of the Tennessee river, out of
which were formed Alabama and Mississippi
and the erection of Tennessee and Kentucky
out of territory belonging to Virginia and
North Carolina. By the second we have all
| that vast and magnificent domain stretching
westward from the Mississippi riverto the Pa
cifc Ocean, including Florida, and excluding
Texas and Oregon. BY the third we have Tex
as, though the resolutions of annexation stipu-
lated that Texas should retain the ownership
of her lands, upon her admission into the In
| ion, which she did, and which cannot there
fore be properly considered in treating of the
| public lands of the United States. By the
fourth we have Oregon. This, with the ex-
ception of Maine, constitutes the whole Of our
area. New York, Massachusetts, and Oonnec-
tcut also made cessions of certain lands over
which they claimed jurisdiction by virtue of
grants from the King of Great Britain, but no
new State was erected out of these grants, ex
! cept Maine, which was originally Massachu-
sets territory. The cessions made by
! the several States occurred under the
old Confederation, with the single excep-
ton of that of Georgia, which occurred
| in 1902. The distinction which we have made
will be readily seen. All that acquired simply
by purchase, beginning with the Louisiana Ter
ritory and ending with the Meslla Valley, is
not subject to the constitutional objection urg-
&c in the cases of cession by the States. Tie
right to purchase and hold at pleasure, nece'
sarily involves the right to sell or otherwise
dispose of at pleasure. If il is constitutional
to purchase, It is certainly no less So tn sell or
give away that which is so obtained. The on
ly obligation resting upon the government, 10
such cases, is that it shall administer the ter
ritory so acquired bona .Jfde so that injustice
will be done to no part of the country. 1t be
log acquired by a common effort and COM
mon fund, il should go to the benefit of the
whole Union alike, and to the general advan-
tage. Having promised this much, as to facts
and principles, which we presume no candid
or fairmnded man will deny, We shall under
take to show, that the first objection is I'M
founded.
The Virginia cession was by far the most
important, and because the others followed il
out in their stipulations we will take that a:
the basis Of our argument. This took place
by an act Of he Legislature of Virginia, OF
goth October, 1883, which was accepted by
Congress March LIST, 1894. After proposing to
+" Convey, transfer, assign and make over IN.
Z" TO the U. S. in Congress assembled, for the
"beneft Of the said States, all right, title and
claim, as we'll Of soil as jurisdiction, which
I" his Commonwealth hath TO the territory OF
tract of country within the limits of the
" Virginia charter, situate, lying aud being, to
" the northwest the river Ohio" the Virginia
act proceeds to stipulate; THAT all the lands
within the territory SO ceded to the U. S.
and not reserved for, or appropriated to, any
- of the before mentioned purposes, or disposed
"of 10 bounties to the officers and soldiers OF
''the American Army, shall be considered AS