|
|
demand — we find her chief executive officer abandoning a
right sustained in the midst of calamitous war, and volun-
teering the opinion, that the assertion of it in the only prac-
ticable mode, would be "a violation of the constitution of
the United States. " Without presuming to question the
sincerity of this opinion, your committee would repeat their
regret, that uncalled for by any constitutional obligation, his
Excellency should have deemed it necessary, while depict-
ing in the darkest and most sombre hues, our State distresses
and difficulties, (for relief from which he suggests no reme-
dy, ) to deny a right of essential importance, and so conse-
crated in our memories, by our deep respect for the firm-
ness, dignity and wisdom of our forefathers.
Reiterating the opinion, that the public lands of the union
were the common property of the States, by virtue of com-
mon conquest and treaty of peace, and that no relinquish-
ment of claims necessary to their absolute title, your com-
mittee now proceed to show, that the right of Maryland to
a proportionate distribution of the proceeds of the public
lands, is not affected or impaired, by locating the abso-
lute dominion of them in the States within whose chartered
limits they were included: and further, that his Excellency
in arguing upon this assumption, has given a construction to
the deeds of cession, not warranted by their terms. Your
committee have already recited the. instructions of Mary-
land, and the resolutions of the Congress. At this time,
the confederation was established, and it will be seen that
the powers granted by these articles to the general Con-
gress, were specific and limited. Power over the public
territory was particularly prohibited, without the consent of
the State including it. Though the States were thus
bounded, for the purposes of common defence, they were
entirely separate and distinct, as to all powers and relations
not expressly embraced by the articles; Maryland acceding
to the confederation with the express reservation of her
claims to share in the vacant territory. We come now to
the cessions of the States, ana as is necessary for the pur-
poses of this argument, your committee proceed to recite
the terms of these cessions — first, as showing the objects,
and next as to the limitations of the terms. By a resolution
of March 1st, 1781, the State of New-York, referring to the
recommendation of Congress before recited, and acknow-
ledging that a portion of waste and uncultivated territory,
within the limits or claims of certain States, ought to be
appropriated, as a common fund, for the expenses of the
8
|
|
|
