Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1859-05-17

The expenses of the payments Of all pen
sioncrs for 'the four years ending in 1881
were eight million ten thousand and fifty-one
dollars in the free States, and two million 1--WE
hundred and lightweight thousand one hun
dred and ninety-one dollars in the shre States
who not only paid their OWL share, but six mil
lion three hundred thousand dollars to the North
N,r Enoland alone received three million
nine hundred and twenty-four thousand nlne
hundred and eleven dollars, rather more than
two dollars a head for erery man, teohdn ana
cb;H in her limits. During the four years,
she paid in taxes to the Federal Treasury, &C
cording to our tables, one dollar and seventy
cents per head, 50 that she actually re-
eeired more in pensions than she paid IN t0res'
These striking and important facts show how
the Pension system operates to the bcneft o.
the North, and to the prejudice of the South
how the North reaps the profits, while the
South bears the burdens.
DISTRIBUTION AND TIE TARIFF.
Upon these kindred questions my comPeu
tor and myself are at issue, nc insisting upon q
distribution of the proceeds of the public lands
from the Federal Treasury amongst the states,
knowing at the same time that the Tariff mus
be made more highly protective and the South
must be oppressed by additional duties, to sup
ply the deficiency created by the proposed dis
tribution. In the discussion Of this question
it is fair that my competitor shall be held tc
the Distribution bill which received his sup
port rs a member of Congress in lS4l. What
is the character of that bill, and what man 1T
Virginia, at this day, will undertake to defend
its grossly unequal provisions In our can,
vass my competitor never attempted to defend
this Bill. nor have his organs done so. He and
they arc for distribution, but neither has yet fur
nished a plan to the people during this can,
vass which they are willing to advocate ant
sustain.
An act providing for the distribution of the
proceeds OF the Public Lands passed Congress,
and was approved by the President on the 4th
day of September, 1871. For this act my
competitor voted, as he has repeatedly admit
ted, and he is therefore committed to it, as a
wise, just, and equitable measure to the old
Statcs-Iirginia inclusive. On the admission
of new States into the Union compacts have
been entered into, between them and the Fed,
cral Government, by which such new States
were to receive five per cent. Of the net pro-
ceeds of the sales of the public lands within
their limits.
The frs, section of the Act Of 1871, provides
that these land States shall receive over and
above the five per cent above mentioned, the
additional sum 'ct' ten per csntum upon the
nett proceeds Of the sales Of the public lands,
which subsequent to the day aforesaid, shall
be made within the limits Of each of said States
respectively" Fifteen per ccntum Of the nett
proceeds of the public lands, is thus assigned
to the land States, before distribution can
commence. But this is not all the favoritism
which this law shows to these land States. BY
the Sth section Of the act it is provided, that
there shall be granted to each" of the land
States specified in the first section of this act,
rire hundred thousand arres Of public Mnd for
Of internal improvement: Provided,
that to each of the said States, which has
received grants for said purposes, there
is hereby granted no more than a quantity Of
land, which shall, together with the amount
such State has received as aforesaid, make five
hundred thousand acres, &c. And, as if this was
not enough, it is provided in the 9th section Of
the said act, THAT there shall he annually
appropriated for completing the surveys Of said
lands, n SUN not less than one hundred and
fifty thousand dollars; and the minimum price
at which the public lands are now sold at pri-
vate sale, stall not be increased, unless Con-
MaH think proper to grant ALTERNATE
along the line cf'ASY CANAL OK orHE.
IMPROVEMENT, and at the same time
to increase the minimum price Of the sections
reserved" &c. Here is the Inauguration Of the
land grant policy, for purposes Of internal I'M
provcmcnt ia the land States, and it has been
carried out with n vengeance, so far as the old
are concerned. The Wing party Of that
day suggested n policy which the rcmnant Of
that party at the present day are now found
denouncing in this canvass.
The party that brought this act into being,
gave to the land States, fifteen per cent in mo-
ncy out OF the nett proceeds ofsalcs ofthe public
lands, and in addition 500, 900 acres Of public
land for purposes Of internal improvement, and
then alternate sections to Canals and other i'm
provcmcntS, before distribution could begin
The expenses Of preparing the lands for sale
were also to he deducted. A Wing Secretary
Of the Treasury ( Waiter Fornard) worked out
the result under this law for the half year end.
ing June 30, 1912. The gross proceeds of the
sales Of the public lands, for that period amoun-
ted to the sum of $685., 2l6.T0. Deduct eXpen-
SEES, 1920, 279, So, and we have left $6l6, 937, II.
Deduct fifteen per cent So, 5+o,56, and We
have for distribution the sum Of 1924, 1896, 81,
to be divided amongst all the States and Terri
tories, ole land States included) according to
their respective federal population" The work.
ing of this system gives about three-fifths to the
Northern or free States, and two-ffths to the
Southern or slave States. Such are the results
of a policy which Tirginians are urgedt to adopt
at this day.
When the proceeds of the sales of the lands
have been distributed, you must then supply
the deficiency in the federal revenue thus crca-
ted. by indirect taxes collected under the ope-
ra,ions of a Tariff. The result is, that you
must pay one set Of agents to collect and dis
tribute the land proceeds md then pay another
set to collect a sum sufficient to supply the de.
fciency, to which must be added the costs Of
distribution and Of collection. The fund is dis
tributcd to the States, according to their res
pcctive federal population" but is the defcien-
cy supplied under a Tariff, according to the
same rule? The friends of the Act Of 1871,
knew that it was not so supplied, and hence
they declared that whenever the rate Of duty,
fixed By the Act of July l4th. 1882, went be.
yond "tuenty per cent. on the ralue Of such
import, or any Of them, then the distribution
provided in this act shall be Suspended" &c
Under the operation Of the Tariff policy, what
has been the proportion Of taxes paid on duties,
by the South and the North? The gross amount
of duties paid after deducting drawbacks on
foreign goods exported, from 1871 to June
30th, 1916, inclusive, amounted to 1927, $500 2
The amount paid on the ratio Of the exports of
their produce by the South, was s711. 200, 900,
while the North paid only s2l5, 1850 OF
If this sum had been apportioned in the
constitutional ratio, between the South and the
North, the South would have paid 1894, 707, OF
and the North would have paid 1882, $40, $50.
1t is thus shown that under the Tariff policy,
the South contributes to the support Of Gov
ernment more than three times as much as the
North, while under distribution the South would
only receive ~tmoJifths of the Land proceeds
The Opposition are for distribution, because
they know it will create the necessity for a
higher Tariff, and thus further their cherished
idea Of protection.