Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1858-05-29

purposes Nay, that when even the lands are sold
and the money goes into the treasury, Congress
to have the power it that it had the
land before its SALE and that it then be given
away.
To an unsophisticated mind this must appear
strange. Congress has no power to give away mo-
ney out of the treasury, to dispose of it. except
for certain purposes enumerated by Mr.. Brown-and
so say We. And yet Congress can take the money,
buy lands ships and other property, as has been
done and then over such property, purchased, it
acquires unlimited power to dispose of it. to give
it away for purposes not contemplated by the
stituton and to which it could have applied the
purchase money. If sold, and the money goes back
into the treasury, the power is goneor perhaps the
lawyers would say, in nubibus-in the clouds-un-
til they think proper to invest again in land or pro-
perty, and then the convenient, shifting, vagrant
power again revives with all its force and Congress-
according to Mr.. Brown and the Raleigh Register,
can give the lands or whatever property is bought,
to the insane, to the poor, any other purposes
in the States-to build railroads and to construct
canals to take stock in the same, or in banks
other incorporated companies, provide for all sub
ects and all expenses of Stale governments, assume
and pay State debts, appropriate the lands or land
warrants to abot other societies to buy up
our own slaves and send them ont Of the country
in fact to engage SO far they have the means
with the public domain and other property, in
thousand schemes, virtually making the government
one OF unlimited powers; for if the lands can
the ways stated by US? Mr. Brown admits that
such is the oaoer but says does follow that it
will be so exercised. Perhaps not; but who will
IL ~. ,ho
ton intended to confer such unlimited power? Or
who is willing to trust Congress with such power
now?
The very fact that the government has not the
power to do these things under the clause
any other shows conclusvey that it not intend
ed to give the power claimed under the clause in re.
lation to land property. 1t would be monsrous to
suppose that under the power to dispose of land and
other property, there urked an unlimited power to
the lands or property for every purpose however
repugnant be given to the insane and the poor where
fore is there not like poaoer to dispose othem in any Of
to the whole spirit of the constitution and its limit
ed character we'll TO the express provision that
the powers not delegated to the United States by
the constitution prohibited by it to the States.
are reserved to the States respectively or to the
people"
1t will not do to take clause of the constitu-
ton, as in this case render it in its most literal
sense and then claim powers under it totally incon-
sisent with the whole spirit and object of the in.
strument, and with the general and limited powers
of the government. Verify, by such course, that
little word dspose" looms up into power of vast
significance overshadowing the constitution itself;
the incident becomes greater than the princi-
pal the general government acquires almost unlim-
tied power, with vast of influence and cor.
ruption; and the State governments, intended to
| supply all our local wants. swallowed up, and
in their stead we have vast consolidated power,
unrestrained by any written constitution. The
| British parliament itself would hardly possess less
power
What, then, did the trainers of the constitution
mean by the power to dispose of land and other
property?
The territory north of the Ohio and east of the
Mississippi rivers coded by the States of Virginia,
| New York, Massachusetts, and Connecticut to the
confederation, almost the only territory held BY
the general government when our existing constitu
ton adopted in lieu Of the articles of confedera-
ton. The cession by North, Carolina Of what is
now the State of Tennessee and by Georgia of what
!
not made until after the adoption of the constitu-
ton. Mr.. Brown, in one part of his speech, ex-
presses the opinion that these lands were not con-
templated to be sold by the constitution, because
there is cypress provision in that instrument for
the dispose! Of the proceeds of SALE But the histo.
ry of the day, and the deeds of cession show that
the very object of the cession to provide for the
public debt present and prospective, and that the
lands were to be held and disposed of for this pus.
pose and none other.
| The ordinance OF 1857 which provided govern.
ment for this territory, and which upon its face pur
| ports to be contract between the people of the
territories and the States of the Union, expressly
provides that the United States shall have the ex-
elusive right of soil and the power to make title to
the purchasers Of the lands. And early as 1896
! Congress passed an act appointing Surveyor Gen.
era with regulations for the surveying Of the lands
and their sale-the commencement of that beautiful
system adopted to the surveying and disposng Of
the public domain, which has been the admiration of
| the world. Strange it is that of Mr. Browns
sense should have fallen into such an error 1t
shows what man may come to when bent on car
| rying out favorite notion or opinion.
By the new constitution, Cart. g. "Al debts con-
tracted and engagements entered into before the
adoption Of this constitution shall be valid against
the United States under this constitution as under
the confederation Mr.. Brown, here hard pressed,
| SAYS that this was intended to apply only to the
Revolutionary debt, and not to the engagements Of
the general government under the deeds Of cession
Wesay that j. applies to eve,y contract or engage
ment Of the confederated government; and We say
further that the whole clause was unnecessary and