|
|
|
share proportionally in the conquests from a common ene-
my, effected by common and united effort. These claims,
in their origin, rested not upon deeds of cessions from the
States, but upon rights over-riding their exclusive claims,
and inherent in all the contending States. As between the
confederate States ami the States ceding territory, these
cessions "did convey the soil as well as the jurisdiction, "
so as to bar those States from a future claim to exclusive
dominion.
But we deny that the acceptance of these cessions, by
the confederated States, implied an acknowledgement of
the justice of such claim of exclusive right of dominion
and property in the ceded territory.
Virginia, New York, etc., could only cede their own
claims. Maryland, as a party accepting the cessions, was,
we are willing to admit, so far bound by them, as the ob-
servance of the conditions attached, required. The claim
of Maryland resting upon participated conquest and treaty,
has never been surrendered; and we deny to the Congress
of the United States any control over that claim, either by
virtue of the cessions or the power under the constitution,
of "disposing of the territory, " except in its capacity as
trustee, (as subsequently explained, ) restricted in its exer-
cise even of that authority, by the invariable declaration
of the States, that the fund arising from this property
should be disposed of for the common benefit and use of
the States in just proportions. But admitting that the
whole title to public lands now rests upon cessions from
the States, we still deny the accuracy of His Excellency's
conclusions. At the period of the cessions, each State
contributed its quota of expense in maintaining and defray-
ing the costs of the war. They were united by articles
of confederation; by league between, not a constitution
over them; each State using all the powers and rights not
necessarily parted with, to give efficiency to their common
agent, the Congress. At this period no idea of a general go-
vernment or federal constitution was mooted; and the States
looked to the ending of the war as restoring to them many
of the rights and authorities temporarily parted with from
the exigencies of the period. The lands at this time
ceded, were unquestionably intended as a fund, primarily,
for defraying the common expenses of the war. New
York, non obstante the intimation of His Excellency, that
no deed looked to an exclusive application of the fund,
expressly states, in her legislative cession, that a portion
of the contested territory "ought to be appropriated as a
|
|
