The Washington union. [volume] (City of Washington [D.C.]) 1857-1859, 1858-01-01

TIC ahus, 80 as W eiltitle theui " c hct ocoo"s
accruing therefrom those governments would be
equitably bound to make good any losses that might
occur. If both the national and State governments
were suable in equity, upon what ground could the
former make the latter responsible for lossesg If the
federal government could not sustain bill in equity
for such losses might occur, the States could not
maintain action for profits, because the rights Of
both must be reciprocal, 1t would be inequita-
BILE for the States to demand profits if any ac-
crned, without sustaining the losses, if such
should occur. The very essence of an eaui-
table adjustment in cases where there is no
fraud is, that the trustee shall make an honest set
Element, and the balance, whichever way it may be,
shall be paid. 1t would be monstlous to compel
trustee to pay balances when found IN his hands
and not reimburse him for losses he night suffer
Now, if the balance shonld be against the aates not
of them could be compelled to pay it, mar would
one admit its liability 1t follows that the States
have neither legal nor equitable right to thepr
ceeds Of the sales Of the public lands and that tsey
are not liable to make good any deficiency or loss.
If they possess neither right, then what claim can
they have to moneys derived from the sales of the
pupIS ldiiub lHey h"No Ho i'Eht WfuSi ti'ch SVn
sions, and none under our purchases, by any agree
ment, or on account of any consideration paid by
them nor have they been defranded Of their prop
erty.
But, If the federal government is a trustee, for
whom does it hold these trusts? As to the
sions by the several States it would seem that they
alone would be entitled to what may remain As
H. l:.,ku
could be made to the other twentyfour. The fund
accrung from lands purchased by treaties stands
clear Of all rational pretence Of being trust.
The government made the purchase, running the
hazards of profit or loss. The States have no
stronger claim to this fund than to derived from
the sale of damaged military stores the site of
old fort It is clear in either that the States
have not nou any right to the proceeds of land sales
It requires as all admit law Of Congress to confer
it, Such law, if extended to the revenues from GUS
toms, would stand upon the same foundation. Both
equally belong to the national treasury. Is there
constitutional authority for such law Clearly not.
The constitution provides that the Congress shall
have power to dispose OF, and make all needtnl rules
and regulations respecting the territory OF other
property belonging to the United States" This
places the lands in the situation as other prop
erty When sold the money for both lands and other
must go intolthe treasury, and when once
there il can only be drawn out lin consequence Of
made 10y law Money can only be
appropriated for a constitutional object This
not mean that it can be drawn out for distribution.
Those who claim that the power of distribution ex-
lists are bound to point out that power before it is
exerted No one pretends to find it in the constitu
ton it is claimed as result of the supposed trust.
No careful reader of the constitution will contend
that duties direct taxes be collected for dis
trbuton. The very terms Of the power exclude all
such meaning.
If money collected from any source shall be dis
trbuted it will be done in violation Of the constitu
ton There is not line word in that nstru-
ment authorizing it. A surplus was neither contem-
plated nor provided for and no power being confer
red none can be exercised, for the simple reason
tkat all powers not conferred necessary to tho %.
ercse of express powers, distinctly prohibited.
H. viii as,e rata day t. the Independence of
the States when the federal government shall be-
come their tax gatherer and they shall become depend
ent upon the latter for the of support They
will then be States only in name. They will
become petty appendages to the great unrestrain-
cd and controlling central power, doing it's bid
dngs to secure the means of slavish existence.
The democracy have always opposed every measure
that tended to any such fatal results both because it
was unwise and unconstitutional Distribution
again appears as the great principle Of portion of
the opposition to the democracy. We are ready to
meet the question upon the ground they have as
sumed. We carry the constitution in one hand and
point to nexpediency with the other and to the humil
iaon and downfall of the States, consequence of
the success of these enemies. Upon this issue they
were beaten in Virginia at the last elections, and will
be in every place where democrats Of the Jefferson
and Jackson school are in the ascendency and per-
form their duty to the constitution to themselves,
and to their country.
EDITORIAL INJUSTICE
The New York Post has repeatedly published the
following sentence as extract from the Presidents