{"character_count": 1660, "word_count": 288, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9675999879837036], "ccnet_perplexity": [1538.0999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
would be S21o,o0o

 Tire proportion she should re- IceiYe being 2I-24ath parts ef s.

 l0o,00o, would be enly 1s3,75o

 Showing clear loss of $26, ,250

 And this Virginia is to get for her liher- tality in eeding immense territories to the United States

 The same result, in q greater or less de- gree, would follow in relation to every one ofthe old States.

 Can the people of those States be delu- dcd by [ scheme of this sort? When they sec urge sum of money coming from the National Treasury, can they be made to forget that they must pay into that Treasu- ", much larger sum 10 take its place?- Gan they be persuaded 1t is their interest that their State Governments shall receive smaller sum from the National Treasury, when they must pay c larger to make 1t upl v hy=not pay the larger sum to their own State Governments, and let Congress keep their expensive grahity2 Is 1t the interest of Virginia to pay $2le,000 that she may received &1s3,75Q! Will her interest be promoted by dead loss of $26,25o per annam!

 I ne same reasoning applies to allthe old States, including Kentucky and Tennessee.

 Lei us look at another aspect Q. this sin- hem are some of the most su0s 'p'iiiia

 tl7iti 2Il. litn' ',s',eaie 49ste Oxen of the public lands is to De paid oyer to the States ia which the lands sold are situated, and the balance only is to be distributed among inc twenty-lour States iii proportion to their federal representative population. Of each million of dollars received in Mis- soari, that State would receive First, one-eighth. $l25,o00 Secondly, 2-24oths ofthe residue,

 being the ratio of her federal

 representative population, 8,343