Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1858-02-19
ME-. McRae at Faxetteville.

and effective review of Mr. McRaes speech delivered at
Fayetteville on Tuesday Of last week. From this re-
view learn that Mr. McRaes address at Fayetteville
was essentially the as that delivered in Whining
ton With trifing exception it was precisely the
same This exception consisted in references to
his friends at Wilmington and Goldsboro' He stated
that the Wilmington JOurnathad not fairly represented
him that the Journal finding it could not answer his
arguments had built up of straw to strike at in
stead of himself, and what that paper had said did not
meet his position at ALL Now, it is easier to charge
Misrepresentation than to prove it, and it is still easier
to say that arguments advanced have not been met but
the arguments are things already before the world and
must speak for themselves. We certainly shall make no
effort to bolster up the character of productions
but we 1rU say, that in notice of Mr.. McRae'S
Speech we and still unconscious of having mis-
represented him his positions we kow that we did
not do so Intentionally We pretended only to review
that portion of his address devoted to land distribution
because that was the only portion we heard fully
for ourselves and in our whole remarks devoted to
that subject we endeavored, as far possible,
to confne ourselves to the question, and lose
sight of the individuality of the speaker. -
If candor compes us to say that MIR. McRaes course
has been an cratic and disorganizing one we do SO
freely although we do it with regret for would be
pleased and more than pleased to hail that gentleman as
q co-worker in the common cause. We would be glad
to hear his eloquent voice raised to promote harmony In
our ranks and not it is, to fan the fires OF dis
cord So far at least as ne concerned Or as the
Fayetteville CarOIindn is concerned, we fell assured
that there is no sentiment of hostility to the Individual
mingled with the opposition which convictions of
duty to the Democratic party and its principles compel
us to make to his of political principles nor in
condemning the disorganizng of the politician
do we seek in any way to hunt down njure the
The position which Mr.. McRae finds himself is of his
own choosing, not ours.
We take from the CGrolinlan some further extracts
from high authorities bearing upon this distribution
controversy and commend them to our readers
On looking over the Debates in Congress find at
its extra session in 184 when the Distribution and
Presumption Bill up Mr.. Calhoun made of the
following language:
THAT we would much rather give the whole of the
lands to the States in which they lay than to distribute
them as proposed by this bill. The bill most
constitutional measure The proceeds of the lands be
onged to the Treasury and if they were not appropria
ted to this purpose then the States had the best
right to them They belonged to the whole Union, anC
this condition the States entered the compact
if this violated the land reverted back to its ORR
gna condition. and became the property of the States
in which it lies Viewed in any light both constitution
al and otherwise this to him, the most odious meas
ere that could be presented.
If it were presented alternative, to give the
States or distribute the proceeds among the States
he would yield up every acre to the States, anC
think he did right Better infinitely better, to leave
them to the States than them for the purposes
of corruption. He regarded the bill such viola
ton of the compact, that if he citizen of the
new States he would not suffer single to be sold
1t only by such language (auding to the remarks
of Mr.. McRoberts) that the Government could be ar
rested in its disposition to plumber Looking to the
bill in all its aspects it was of all others the most alb
horrent to his feelings" [See Congressional Globe
Page 1872.
+ We find that VIM. r. King, at the same Session
took sides and voted with Mr. Calhoun that question
We will also inform readers what the views of Sias
Wright were respecting the cOnstitutionalty and the
policy of distribution. By turning to pages 38l and
aga of tho Cobo for the Extra Session of 1641 they
will find that distinguished Statesman and uninching
democrat, using the following language the dstribu
ton bill.
"I refer, first, to the rule of distribution The bill
came here from the House of Representatives with 6
correct constitutional rule if indeed, there be any
constitutional rule for giving money from the Fedora
Treasury to the States, which not only do not admit
but positively deny Yet, admitting for the sake of the
argument, and do that unwiingy, that distri
button be constitutionaly made is there there
be, doubt that the rule of distribution must be that
taxation to be constitutional"
" Let the cloud of national difficulties thcken anG
blacken until the bosom of every in the nation
shall feel that honor and safety demand resistance
to aggressons and where is the Congress to be founC
which will declare war; when the State Legislatures
crying out u.s. save our dstrbutive share of the Ma
tional revenue? Where is the Senator to from
which will withstand such call coming from such
quarter and address to those who hold their places by
legislative election? 1t cannot, it will not be; ant
neither such Senate nor such Congress will b.
found until this unnatural policy is entirely abandoned
1t is plain that he not only denied the Constitutional
ty, but also in strong Language condemns the policy.