Puslapio vaizdai
PDF
„ePub“

by the lower classes. The negligence and supineness of the poor with regard to vaccination is really astonishing; and as an example of it we may refer to Mr Cross's account of the pauper vaccination in Norwich. It appears, that a reward of half a crown was offered to every poor person who should bring a certificate of his having passed regularly through the cow-pox; and yet the number of rewards actually paid in a population of 47,000 were one year only eleven, and never exceeded sixty-four, except when an alarm of small-pox existed, which raised the number to three hundred and forty-eight. The cause of vaccination is the cause of humanity. It is of the greatest importance that it should be seen in its true light, lest society deceived by an imperfect knowledge of any of the facts which have come to light with relation to it, should diminish their confidence in its powers. By its universal diffusion alone, can we hope to be delivered from the greatest Scourge which has ever afflicted our species, from a disease the most disgusting and loathsome in all its forms, a disease which has been computed to sweep from the earth annually nearly a million of human beings, and to leave almost as many more in a state of blindness or disfiguration, a disease, which according to sir Gilbert Blane, has destroyed a hundred for every one that has perished by the plague.

[ocr errors]

ART. XV.-1. Report with sundry Resolutions relative to Appropriations of Public Lands for the purposes of Education, to the Senate of Maryland, January 30, 1821. By V. Maxcy, chairman of the committee on Education and Public Instruction.

2. Report on the expediency of granting Public Land for the support of Education in the Senate of the United States, February 9th, 1821.

3. Report of the Committee on Colleges, Academies, and Common Schools, in the Legislature of New York, March 30, 1821, upon the Message of his Excellency the Governor, communicating the Resolutions of the Legislature of Maryland. By G. C. Verplanck, chairman of the committee.

THE subject, which we are now about to consider, is manifestly of great national importance. It relates to a very exten

1821.] sive appr schools.

considera

some of t
been exte
a question
eral gover
conceived
states.

T

believe, b
of the con
senate of
manner in
Mr Maxcy
The put
the commo
an equal rig
fund of nati
why the ped
those states
public land
tages from
remain in t
enlightened
appropriatio
ing in the
most heartil
ion that the
common sw

entitled, upo
tions for the

in their own The Repo duced too la sion of the l

the year follo elaborate Re of delegates passed in bot

[ocr errors]

1. Resolve of the United efit of the publ New Series

sive appropriation of the national property for the support of schools. Grants of national lands have already been made to at considerable extent, for the aid of colleges and schools in some of the western states. The same grants have not as yet been extended to the old states, and it seems now to be made a question, whether these states have any claims on the general government for similar grants, as a balance to what are conceived to be at present the exclusive privileges of the new states. The subject was first brought before the public, we believe, by Mr Maxcy in a report made by him as chairman. of the committee on education and public instruction, in the senate of Maryland, February 1, 1820. After stating the manner in which the lands have been granted in the west, Mr Maxcy observes;

"The public lands, though located in the west and south, are the common property of all the United States. Each state has an equal right to a participation, in a just proportion of that great fund of national wealth. Your committee can discern no reason why the people, who have already settled in, or shall remove to, those states and territories, which have been formed out of these public lands, should enjoy any peculiar and extraordinary advantages from this common property, not possessed by those who remain in the original states. They are far from censuring that enlightened policy, which governed congress in making the liberal appropriations above mentioned, for the encouragement of learning in the new states and territories. They, on the contrary, most heartily applaud it. But they, at the same time, are of opinion that the people of the original states of this union, by whose common sword and purse those lands have been acquired, are entitled, upon principles of the strictest justice, to like appropriations for the endowment and support of literary institutions, within their own limits.'

The Report, containing the words here quoted, was introduced too late to be taken into consideration during that session of the legislature. The same proposition was renewed the year following by Mr Maxcy, and defended in an able and elaborate Report, which was adopted by the senate and house of delegates of Maryland. The following resolutions were passed in both houses.

1. Resolved by the General Assembly of Maryland, that each of the United States has an equal right to participate in the benefit of the public lands, the common property of the union.

New Series, No. 8.

41

[ocr errors]

2. That the states in whose favor Congress has not made appropriations of land for the purposes of education, are entitld to such appropriations as will correspond, in a just proportion, with those heretofore made in favor of the other states.

3. That his excellency the governor be requested to transmit copies of the foregoing Report and Resolutions to each of our senators and representatives in congress, with a request, that they will lay the same before the respective houses, and use their endeavors to produce the passage of an act to carry into effect the just principles therein set forth.

4. That his excellency the governor be also requested to transmit copies of the said Report and Resolutions to the governors of the several states of the union, with a request that they will communicate the same to the legislatures thereof, respectively, and solicit their co-operation.'

These resolutions have been accordingly transmitted to the governors of the several states. In Virginia, if we are rightly informed, they were assented to unanimously. In New York a counter report was drawn up by Mr Verplanck, chairman of the committee on colleges, academies, and common schools, and accepted by a majority of the legislature. Connecticut has approved the Maryland resolutions, and adopted a report, which, among other things, contains a resolution requesting 'the senators and representatives of that state in the Congress of the United States to use their endeavors to procure an appropriation of a part of the public lands, for the promotion of the objects of science and education in the several states, to be divided among them in such manner and proportion as to congress shall appear just and equitable.' What have been the decisions of the other states, whose legislatures have been in session since they received the Maryland resolutions, we have not learned.

Before we undertake the investigation of the principles on which the Maryland resolutions are founded, it may be well to inquire a little into the manner in which the United States came into possession of the public lands. The greatest part of those, on the east side of the Mississippi river, was derived by cessions from several states. The claims of these states to any portion of the lands, beyond their established boundaries, were, in our view, for the most part merely nominal, and in no case supported by any good foundation. Take Virginia

as a memorable example. This state professed to claim all the extensive and valuable territory northwest of the Ohio,

[blocks in formation]

Mexico
United

the cour granted limits. patent v compani

near Ca
take pos
coast, an
one hund

The s
the South
pany, in
first pater
the boun
ter from
revolution
The bour
pany wer
America,

or Point
two hund
along the
all that spa
precinct a

sea, west a men at the their sagac half of this however, it and on this

the unsettl from sea to tween the notwithstan Their mode

than, accord

By gradual

and east of the Mississippi. But upon what grounds will appear by a very brief statement of facts.

Originally the whole tract of country north of the Gulf of Mexico, extending to the present northern boundary of the United States, was called Virginia. This name was given to the country after sir Walter Raleigh's expedition. The patent granted to him by queen Elizabeth specified neither name nor limits. The new patent of James I was more definite. This patent was granted with similar conditions to two separate companies, one of which settled at Plymouth, and the other near Cape Henry. The quantity of land of which each was to take possession was limited to one hundred miles along the coast, and one hundred up the country, making a square of one hundred miles.

The settlers near Cape Henry were usually denominated the South Virginia, or the London Company. To this company, in the year 1609, and six years after the date of their first patent, was granted a new patent or charter, enlarging the boundaries of their former grant. And this is the charter from which Virginia professed to derive her title, after the revolutionary war, to the territory northwest of the Ohio. The boundaries of the tract thus granted to the London Company were defined as follows, namely, being in that part of America, called Virginia, from the point of land called Cape or Point Comfort all along the sea-coast to the northward, two hundred miles, and from the point of Cape Comfort all along the sea-coast to the southward two hundred miles; and all that space and circuit of land lying from the sea-coast of the precinct aforesaid, up into the land throughout from sea to sea, west and northwest.' Charter of Virginia, sec. 6. Few men at the present day, probably, would presume so much on their sagacity, as to attempt to attach any meaning to the last half of this extract. At the commencement of the revolution, however, it was discovered to have a very profound meaning, and on this obscure clause alone were built the claims to all the unsettled lands in the northwestern territory. The phrase, from sea to sea, it was contended, meant the whole space between the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans. But the claimants, notwithstanding, were not so exorbitant in their demands. Their moderation brought them within vastly narrower limits, than, according to their interpretation, the charter warranted. By gradual encroachments, other states had been formed with

in what were contended to be the chartered limits, and Virginia was at length bounded on the north by Maryland and Pennsylvania, and on the south by North Carolina. By the treaty of 1763 between England and France, the Mississippi was established as the boundary between British America and Louisiana. This brought the limits of Virginia very much short of the Pacific Ocean. And, finally, the claimants were contented to have their territory compressed within the lakes on the north, and the Mississippi on the west; thus giving up the very interpretation of their charter, upon which alone they professed to found any claim.

But what makes the thing still more extraordinary is, that the charter was vacated, fifteen years after it was granted, by a quo warranto from Charles I. The company, to which it had been given, was dissolved. Oldmixon says, that this was caused by the mismanagement of the proprietors. Grants were given to private adventurers, who not only raised quarrels among themselves, but exasperated the Indians, and induced them to commit outrages on the peaceable settlers. To prevent further difficulties, king Charles dissolved the company, and annulled the charter. He took the colony under his own direction, sent out officers of his own appointment, reserved a quitrent to himself, and ordered all grants and patents to be given in his name. How then could any claim be made under this charter, even admitting the obscure clause, which alone was supposed to sanction the claim, to have any meaning? The charter was never afterwards made the rule of government in the colony. The king was the only proprietor and Virginia was in the strictest sense a regal province.

This was also the understanding of the British government, as is manifest from the proclamation of the king in 1763, relating to the American colonies. It is there stated to be the royal will and pleasure, that no governor, or other officer in the colonies should 'grant warrants of survey, and pass patents for any lands beyond the heads or sources of any the rivers, which fall into the Atlantic Ocean from the west, or northwest.' Laws of the U. S. vol. i, p. 446. This language is a proof, that the king considered Virginia a regal colony, and hat its western boundary, even in that charter, did not extend beyond the Alleganies. The Council of Virginia received the king's proclamation in this sense, as may be seen in a letter of he president of the council to Lord Hillsborough. After

wards, a lands on a sharp minding should be

of 1763, the facts ence is i no claims the Virgi

T

in an ess more fam for the c for religio to the oth quite as g charters, b ed, are eit to render i claim. ter of Mas grounded. vince, the ditaments extending land called and in latit within all th main land ocean, on th far as our co ragansett co has any clea that it could thousand mi ocean; mor

pass directly made by Ch Connecticut

guage, that th *The charter 1601; and the g

« AnkstesnisTęsti »