Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1857-06-17
rr,ou the Richmond lY..l South, I

From the Richmond (Va-) South.l
DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE
PUBLIC LANDS-CONSIITUT1 VI
THE MEASURE.
In the very moment Of victory, the Democratic
party seem threatened with dissension the ques-
ton of distribution 1t is inconceivabe to us that
a question so completely settled on grounds OF con-
stitutonaity and expediency, should have vitality
enough to provoke discussion. That Democrats
should doubt when that great debate between Clay,
Webster, and Calhoun, still rings in their ears,
which consigned all doubt to the tomb of the Capu
lets is passing strange and can only be accounted
for by the langour and dsorganzation which follow
great success Victory scatters the seed of defeat
and victorious party should never look to its in
tegrity with jealous care, than in the period of
reaction Immediately succeeding their triumph.
We propose to recall to the memory of our Dem
ocratic brethren, the outline of the constitutional
argument on the distribution question. To attempt
anything new a topic exhausted by the greatest
minds Of our day, would be presumptuous; all that
we do, is to restore with pious what seems
to be fading from the memory of the present gener-
alton.
On the eve of General Harrison's advent to pow
er, one Of his future Cabinet Mr. Crittenden intro
duced proposition in the Senate for the distribu-
ton of the sales of the public lands among the
States. 1t underwent searching discussion and
thinking men must admit that the great South
Caronan was more than match for his formidable
antagonists Messrs. Clay and Webster. The con-
stitutionality of the proposed measure was warmly
argued.
Mr. Ciay took the broadest Federal ground with
reference to the power of Congress over the public
lands "'The grant," he said, "of power to Con-
gress, the public lands, is ample and compre.
hensye. The Constitution provides that congress
shall have power to dispose of and make all neediul
rules and regulations respecting the territory or
other property belonging to the United States. This
is broad unlimited and plenary p0'eer, SUBJECT to
no restriction, other than sound, practical, ana
statesmanlke discretion to be exercised by Congress-
HAS Congress" replied Mr. Calhoun. the r,sht
of disposing of the public domain, and ak other
property belonging to the Union, and the revenue
derived therefrom as pleases without any consti-
tutional restrictions? Can it endow an established
church with the proceeds Of the public lands?
"No;" said Mr.: Webster, "the Constitution ex'
pressly forbids it"
81 hear the answer with pleasure" said Mr..
Calhoun at assigns the true reason. Here, then,
we have limitation in the Constitution, by the
confession of the Senator"
"Can the proceeds of the public lands, !" he con-
tinued "be used by Congress to COLOMBO and chris
tianize Africa? Can they be distributed among
abolition societies? The Senator is silent. l did
to say no. would be to surrender the whole ground.
Nor can he say, as he did, that it is prohibited by
the Constitution | will relieve the Senator. l
answer for him. Congress has no such right; be-
cause Congress can exercise no power unless it be
expressly granted by the Constitution, or be neces-
sary to execute the granted powers"
Here we have the annunciation of the Virginia
course of construction: Whenever question arises
concerning the consttutionality of particular
power" said Mr.. Madison, in his famous report,
"the first question is, whether the power be ex-
pressed in the Constitution. If it be, the question
is decided If be not expressed the next enquiry
must be, whether it is properly an incident to an
express power, and necessary to its execution. If
it be- it may be exercised by Congress. If be not,
Congress cannot exercise il"
This great principle is the key to the Constitu-
ton 1t solves at once most of the questions OF
construction that have perplexeG our statesmen. 1t
is the corner-sto of State rights and the
~ stay of Southern interests For US to overturn
it is to commit political suicide Applied to the
question of distribution, it establishes at once the
negative side of that question. is distribution ex-
pressly authorized by the Constitution? No; it is
not so pretended! Is it necessary and proper 10
the execution of any expressly granted power? If
SO, which of them? Run over the list. l: does not
"tend to regulate commerce.; to coin money; to
establish post Offices and post roads, to define and
punish felonies on the high seas to raise and sup
port armies; to provide and maintain navy" On
the contrary, it impairs the power of the General
Government to do most of these things, by lessen.
ing the revenue. lneTe IS no express power WHICH
distribution aids the execution of, but many which
it impedes and impairs. Whence, them is it deriv-
ed? From the power to dispose of the public terri
tory? How dispose of it? In any manner Con-
gress sees it, says Mr.. Clay. Then Congress has
thousand million Of Of land at its command to
do with it it pleases and this Government passes
at once from the list of limited governments to
pure, unmitigated despotism. There is no other
restriction Says Mr. Clay than "a sound, practical
and statesman.lke discretion" Imagine the "sound,
practical and statesman-like discretion" of the last
House Of Representatives the only safeguard to
the liberties of the country!
Let US return, however, to the debate in the Sen.
ate. Feeling the force of the objection that upon
his premises the distribution of the public revenue
would be constitutional, Mr.. Clay emphatically dis
claimed any such doctrine. "There is, l repeat"
he said, mo power or authority in the General
Government to lay and collect taxes in order dis
tribute the proceeds among the States"
The Senator from Massachusetts,, with holder
views, urged Mr.. Calhoun, contended for such pow.
er. Mr.. Webster promptly denied that he did,
Ihen said Mr. Calhoun, by what political alchemy
can the revenue by being vested in land become
Tree from the restrictions imposed on it as money?
The question was not only unanswered, but unan.
swerable; and we repeat it now, and request our
adversaries to do what Messrs. Clay and Webster
did not attempt. Louisiana and the new acquisi-
tons from Mexico were purchased from the revenues
OF the government. These revenues, it is admitted,
could not be constitutona'y distributed among the
States. By what political alchemy are the lands
themselves freed from the restriction imposed by
the c. nst itution on the money useo in purchasing
them! Can Congress increase its power at pleasure
by the purchase of territory? Can it provide an
inexhaustibe fund subject to no other contro! than
ls sound, practical and statesman-like discretion"
If so, let US introduce the political institutions of
Russia, Austria or Turkey, and secure an equal
share CT freedom with the subjects of the Gar, the
Emperor and the Sultan.
We may be told, however, that the lands ceded
oy virginia arc not yet exhausted, and that these,
~ least, may be distributed. So said Mr. CLAY.
The deed Of cession makes the land common
1und, said he, for the use and benefit of the
members Of the confederation accordinn To tba;r