The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1858-02-23
DISTRIBUTION.

ing IL Ldlkeu doouL' indeed, they have SO
often settled the question as a wild, uncon-
stitutional and visionary scheme, that
majority of them look upon it only as
subject of ridicule. It may, once in a
while, serve the purpose of nondescript
politician to sweep over a county and reach
the State Legislature, or to enlist a small
floating capital in the futile attempt to
prize him into the Gubernatorial chair but
as for it ever becoming the policy of the
federal government, the thing is impracti-
cable, impossible, and never will be done.
The opposition press, however, and men
protesting to be Democrats-but who, we
believe, have only taken upon them that
name because they thought it the surest
password 20 office-have sought to revive
this dead issue as one exactly adapted to
the wants of North Carolina. They have
dragged it forth from it's slumbers in the
grave of oblivion, and have searched the
musty records of the past, if, perchance,
they might find the views of some great
man with which to bolster it into life. And
who, we ask, has aroused it from its rest
ing place! Did the people of the State do
| it! No! Has any primary assembly from
| the mountains to the seabeard uttered a
syllable in it's favor? Ne! Has any or
ganized party asked for it No; when the
only party capable of doing such thing
was in existence, it left North Carolina and
her ''share" of the public lands to go to the
dogs, and busted itself in rectifying the
Pope of Rome and prating about foreign
influence! Well. who did it? Why, Messrs.
McRae and Leak, backed by portion of
the anti democratic whig-Anerican- know
nothing press of the State And yet, these
men profess to be Democrats Tell it
not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of
Askelon."
Mr. McRae recently pronounced his dis
| tribution Grafton in Fayetteville and Raj
eigh. which was pretty much the same as
the one delivered in Wilmington the Caro-
linian and Journal have ably refuted the
gentlrman's arguments, and have shown
that in name and practice he is with the
opposition; and as sueh, therefore, he will
be treated, not only by the democratic
press, but by the party throughout the
State. 1t will not do for Mr. McRae to
attempt to tack his horesy upon the ancient
articles of democratic faith, and not expect
to have that heresy denounced and ex-
posed. He knows we'll enough that such
denunciation is right, and expected it from
the beginning.
Distribution, then. is made the issue be-
tween the opposition and the democratic
party-an opposition composed, as we have
shown, not ONLY of the fragments of dis
organized parties, but of few restless
spirits from the democratic ranks, who,
impatient of the safe and purifying. process
by which the party places men in response
BILE positions, have sought to make hobby
of this question, upon which to ride rough
shod into place and power over the party
to which they are indebted for any Gistinc-
ton they may enjoy.
We have said that distribution of the
public lands among the States can never
justly become the policy of the General
Government. The acts of cession by which
| these lands were conveyed from the old
States to the government, expressly de-
clare that they shall be used for defraying
the expenses of the goyernment-for the
use of all the States-and for no other pur-
pose whatever. Mr. Clay, in q report made
to the Senate in 1882, said:
:" BY the clear and positive terms of the acts
of ccssiOn great public national trust was crea-
ted and assumed by the general government.
1t became solemnly bound to hold and admin
lister the lands coded a common fund for the
use and benefit of all the States, and for no
other use or purpose whatever"
And Mr. Webster, in the Senate in 1929,
used this language:
81 look upon the public lands as public
fund, and that we more authOiize to
give them away gratuitously, than to give away
gratuitously the money in the treasury
And now, we ask, would it be right,
would it be justice to those States to give
away this fund and then collect from them,
either by direct taxation, or indirectly by
duties on imports, the amount necessary
to defray the legitimate expenses of the
general government? Bat it is said they
would receive share of the lands. Sup
pose they did; it would simply be taking
money out of one pocket and putting it in
the other, and a round about and eXpen
sive way of doing it, too; for it costs the
Federal Government now about 81 100000
annually to keep up its land office, but if
the public lands were distributed there
would then be thirty one land offices; and
with this heavy expense bearing upon each
State, and all anxious to realize something
from sales, who can foretell the evils re-
sulting from this clash of interests-from
the formation of Specializing Land Com
panes-and from the collisions consequent
upon such competition
The present system, under the prudent
management of the Federal Government,
has worked well. What did Mr. Clay think
of it After speaking of the beneficial