Stirling township, chiefly fragments of lots, out of which grants have been made, pursuant to acts from time to time passed by the legislature, 7,062 On the west side of Lake George, N. of North-west Bay, 7,464 4,253 465 3,670 7,850 8,784 South of do. Part of To. No. 2, To. No. 9 and 10, Part of To. No. 11, In Totten and Crossfield's purchase, about S. W. of Totten and Crossfield's purchase, about Total, acres, "The islands in the Niagara river, and Carleton island, and the isle on Long Sault in the river St. Lawrence, not having been surveyed, nor any means of ascertaining their contents obtained, are not comprised in the estimate. Also, the lands reserved for village lots and their accommodation at Oswego, Black Rock, Lewiston, and the Oneida Castle, and the Stedman farm on the Niagara river. Besides which, there is a gore left between the old military tract and the tract granted to the Canadian and Nova-Scotia refugees, to supply deficiencies, and also a gore along the Pennsylvania line, left for a similar purpose. It is yet uncertain what will remain after the purposes for which they are left, shall be answered. It will, however, not be considerable." Some of the above lands have been sold since the date of the surveyor-general's report, and other lands have reverted to the state. The comptroller, in his last annual report to the legislature, stated the amount remaining unsold at 970,000 acres, and it is about the same at present. To make an exact account of the unsold land in each tract, would require considerable time and labour, and would, perhaps, be of very little more use than the one now presented, which, it is hoped, will be sufficient for the purposes of the committee. With respect to the value of the unsold lands, it is believed, that by far the greatest part of them are not worth more than from twenty-five to fifty cents an acre. They are mostly in the northern parts of the state, in the counties of Essex, Warren, and the eastern part of Montgomery, being mountainous, rocky, and barren. Besides the above mentioned lands, there was purchased, about fours years since, a tract from the St. Regis Indians, of which there remains unsold about 6400 acres, valued, by the surveyor general, at six dollars per acre, amounting to 38,400 dollars. This value was estimated in 1817. It is proper also to state, that the Oneida Indians still retain about And the Onondagas 15,000 acres 300 22,300 acres Which the surveyor general, in the same year, valued at 10 dollars per acre, making 223,000 dollars. These lands may hereafter come into the possession of the state. (See note at the end of this statement.) There is also the Onondaga Salt Springs reservation owned by the state, which the late comptroller supposed to be worth 300,000 dollars, appropriated to the canal. See act of 30th March, 1820, chap. 117. Exclusive of all the above, the state owns the following lands, which are appropriated for particular purposes, viz. For the literature fund, about For the support of the Gospel and schools, a number of lots, quantity unknown. For the Common School fund, all the lands in the military Lands, given by the Holland Company, Mr. Hornby, Mr. 3,500 acres. 100,632 acres. 4,000 104,632 acres. The proceeds of Grand Island, in the Niagara river, are also appropriated by law to the canal fund. COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, September 15, 1821. After the preceding statement was made out, it was revised by the surveyor general, who added the following note: In the plan of Black Rock village there are remaining unsold lots to the amount of In Lewiston Stedman's farm Fort Niagara Amount on Niagara river, except islands In the Oswego villages between 600 and 700 acres. 604 acres. 327 511 716 2228 acres. In the St. Regis reservation there remains yet belonging to the Indians about 16,000 acres, besides the 640 acres or mile square, on Grass River. The motion was further opposed by Messrs. Sutherland, M'Call and Russell, and supported by the mover and carried. MR. KING moved further to insert after the words "by the state," the following except such part thereof as may be reserved or appropriated to the public use, or ceded to the United States." Carried. GEN. J. R. VAN RENSSELAER moved further to add the following provision; "It shall be the duty of the legislature annually to apportion, and add to the fund denominated the school fund, at least the sum of thirty thousand dollars, until the said fund shall in the whole amount to the sum of $5,000,000; and the interest on the whole fund shall be annually distributed and applied to the sup port of common schools." COL. YOUNG opposed the motion. It was neither more nor less than anaked proposition to lay direct taxes for the purpose of increasing the school fund, GEN. VAN RENSSELAER replied, when the question was put and lost. The first part of the section as amended, relative to the school fund, was ther carried in the affirmative, without a division. On the residue of the section relative to the canal fund. MR. RUSSELL moved to amend so much thereof as relates to the duties on salt, and the tolls on the canal, by substituting therefor the following: That the tolls on the navigable communications between the great western and northern lakes and the Atlantic ocean; and the duties on the manufacture of salt within the state, as may be established by the legislature, shall be inviolably appropriated and applied to the payment of the interest and reimbursement of the capital of the money already borrowed, or which hereafter shall be borrowed to make and complete the navigable communications aforesaid, and for no other purpose whatever." MR. KING remarked, that the duties and tolls were pledged by the legisla ture as the representatives of the people, and he thought the Convention were bound to sanction that pledge. No additional assurance is required. It is only to confirm what has been already promised. The faith of the country has gone forth, and those who are intrusted with the public honour, cannot recali without redeeming it. The western part of the state was doubtless destined to be the most populous part of it. They will furnish a majority in the legislature. He alluded to that part of the state, and the members of it, with great deference and respect. But the history and condition of mankind have shown, that when men are impelled by interest, and possess the power of relieving themselves from a burthen, they are extremely apt to lighten it off from their own shoulders. He would merely allude to a state of things that might hereafter exist. And were the state of things reversed, it would, in his opinion, be perfectly pro per that the South should then be put under bonds. What is a mortgage, a com mon instrument, but a pledge for good behaviour? Mr. K. said he was not wanting in respect or affection for his western brethren, but in fidelity to the common interest of the state, the committee could not do less than recommend such a provision. There was no intimacy that could forbid such a proposition, even among brothers. The state derived great honour from the magnificence of this work. And do we not expect to receive great advantage from it? Why, then, should we be averse to confirming a pledge that was made in good faith? The pledge is mutual. It is a pledge on our part also that the work shall go on, and that future funds shall be created to ensure its completion. The different parts of the state were bound up in one society, and connected by the strongest sympathies of interest and feeling. MR. RUSSELL said that the requiring a pledge of this kind to be incorporated in the constitution, could not be regarded in any other way than as to express a distrust of the integrity of the people of the western part of the state; and he must therefore resist it: He was confident that there was no good reason for this jealousy; the people of the west would have no disposition to violate the faith which had been pledged. MR. NELSON. From the report of the committee, and the explanation giv en by the honourable chairman, it would appear that the duty on salt in the western district is not only to be inviolably appropriated to the payment of the interest and redemption of the principal of the canal debt, but that the amount of that duty is to be fixed in the constitution. We are told, that it was pledged by the act of 1817, and that we ought to renew it in the Convention. When that law was passed, and the pledge given, a Convention was not expected; why then should we engraft it in the constitution? Let us leave it as we find it. By the act of 1817 the duty on all sales at auction, with the exceptions then mentioned, were pledged in conjunction with the salt duty. Why have not the committee fixed in the constitution the amount of those duties, so as to prevent legislative discretion hereafter on that subject? In the same act also a tax of one dollar per passenger for every 100 miles, was laid on steam boat possengers, and pledged for the same purpose in conjunction with the salt duty, and that upon auctions. Why is not that tax perpetuated by constitutional provision? All these funds were raised by the same act, and pledged for the same purpose-and why make any distinction between them, if there must be a constitutional provision? Mr. Nelson was not unwilling that the revenues which government may see fit to collect from the salt on the canal, should be inviolably appropriated to the extinguishment of the canal debt. They have been so pledged by the act of 1817, but the amount of that tax or toll ought to be left to legislative regulation. The distribution of the burthens of government is a subject of legislation, not for the Convention. It is the business of the persons administering the government to devise ways and means for meeting its expenses, or raising money to carry on public improvement. The amount of the duty on salt is not a subject of complaint among those whom it is supposed most immediately to effect. It is not that they desire to get rid of the payment of the duty, that I object to its being fixed in the constitution: but, sir, the affairs of this state may change with the times, and the interest of the people may require that this duty should be abolished or reduced; if those times should arrive the legis lature ought not to be prevented by constitutional prohibition. Suppose, sir, the revenue derived from the canal tolls should be so great that, in a few years, that alone would redeem the canal debt, might it not be wise in the legislature to reduce the revenue realized from the salt, and leave the discharge of that debt to the tolls? Or, suppose the legislature should believe the interest of the community required that a part of the duty imposed upon salt should be taken off, and laid upon some other subject of taxation, ought they not to have the power of doing so? By fixing the amount of the salt tax, you deprive the western part of this state of the benefit of legislative experience and discretion on this subject. The tax imposed on steam boat passengers has been modified by a subsequent legislature, so may be the duties on salt, or any other pledge given by act. Mr. Nelson said, it looked like an unreasonable jealousy of one part of the state toward the other, or of those who are to come after us. Gentlemen from the west might as well indulge in squeamish jealousies of the south or north, and for fear they might hereafter impose an enormous tax upon our western salt, ask this Convention to fix it in the constitution, that no legislature should raise the tax above one shilling per bushel. If they will not trust the west in the legislature, lest they might be disposed to reduce the tax, the west should not trust the south and the north, lest they may raise it. But it is unreasonable and unjust that the Convention should legislate for posterity, or for any particular portion of this state. The subjects, of taxation ought in his opinion, to be left to the discretion of future legislatures, whose dignity and honour would never permit them to act contrary to public faith or public good. Unfounded jealousies never ought to be indulged, and he nev er could consent to vote for a clause in the constitution avowedly based upon a want of confidence of one section of this state in the other. COL. YOUNG was very sorry that gentlemen in different parts of the state should regard this as a local question. He thought it was a subject in which all sections were equally interested. In relation to the salt duty he would observe, that within three years the people of the east would consume the western salt, and when the New-York market will be entirely supplied with salt from the western salt-works; it was now sold at Utica for two shillings per bushel, including the duty of twelve and an half cents. When the communication with the North River should be completed, this salt might be brought to the city of New-York, and sold there for less than half the sum now paid for salt in that market; and the whole state would then consume no other salt but this, and every man who purchased a bushel of it, would pay one shilling towards the canal fund; In the west, the people had already reaped great advantage from the canal. Notwithstanding the duty of twelve and an half cents per bushel, the western people now paid no more for the salt than they did before the duty was imposed. The toll which the commissioners had established, was extremely smail; not exceeding one cent per ton, and on salt about half a cent. To carry a ton from Albany to Buffalo, by land, he said, cost from ninety to one hundred dollars. When the canal was completed it would be carried for about seven dollars. It did, therefore, appear to him, that there ought to be no objection to this provision from any quarter. MR. EASTWOOD said they had no objection to the price of the duty which was now put on salt, but they were not willing it should be put into the constitution. If the amendments were separately presented to the people, he had not much fear about it: but the people of the western counties would be up in arms about it. if the constitution should be made anew, so as to require a single vote upon the whole or none. GEN. ROOT observed, that he had rather have no provision at all in the constitution, respecting the canal pledge, than to insert that of the gentleman from Erie, (Mr. Russell.) This fund was pledged to those who made the loan. Pass this amendment, and it would be paramount to the statute of 1817, and it would release the legislature from that pledge. The people have power undoubtedly to violate that pledge; but the power is one thing, and the moral right is another. A few years ago a local tax was pretended to be imposed on the lands bordering on the canal. He was aware at the time, that it was a mere pretence to gild the pill. But every effort since that time, to levy and collect that tax, has been fruitless and unavailing. But it is said, that we must rely on the legislature, and that the people will be magnanimous. He was aware that if the pledge was continued, some might feel the weight of its obligation, but if the amendment obtained,it would wholly cease to operate. Some legislators were not much restrained by pledges. A steam boat tax was once levied and pledged for this purpose, but a subsequent legislature, under the shield of modification, reduced it to $5000, and magnanimously appropriated Grand Island to supply the deficiency. The pledge of 1817 had not, therefore, remained inviolate, but it was not entirely gone, and he wished to save the remainder by a constitutional provision. Suppose no such provision should be made. What will be the consequence? A new census will shortly be taken and a new apportionment made, when your northern and western canals, and your lateral cuts, will cut in upon two-thirds of the legislature, and vote down the tolls and duties all together. Your legislature has already voted away and got rid of your lands, and we are told, on this floor, that if we require them to pay their debts, the western country will be in arms. If this be the case, it is best to try the experiment soon. Hercules is yet young, and may be bound. The lion of the west, of whom we have often heard, is yet a whelp, not full grown; let us then, endeavour to curb his ferocious power before he tears us in pieces. From five to ten millions of dollars are fastened upon us already, from which there is no escaping. The farms of all the good people of Delaware are mortgaged for the payment, when, at the same time, they derive not the least possible benefit from it. They have then a right to demand, that the inducements that were held out, and the faith that was solemnly pledged, should be redeemed by an irrevocable provision in the constitution. Good faith requires it. Common honesty requires it. It was the right of his constituents to demand it. Mr. R. entertained no jealousy of his western brethren. As individuals, he would repose in them with a secure and unsuspecting confidence. But as a public body--in a collective capacity, it was as unreasonable to ask, as it was foolish to expect, the performance of those promises which individual justice would scorn to violate. The faith of public bodies is well understood; and the same man, who, as an individual, would shrink from every act that savoured of injustice, would often, in a public capacity, be guilty of violations of duty that were wholly irreconcileable with justice and duty. They would pocket private honesty, and adopt political expediency. Mr. R. proceeded to investigate the progress of the canal-the pretences that had been made use of the policy that had been resorted to-the inducements that had been held out-the direct promises and pledges that had been made, until at last it became a hobby so very alluring, that the only anxiety |