Here's a quote: " That the unappropriated lands ... shall be disposed of for the common benefit of the United States
That is, not transferred to ownership of the individual new state for its sole benefit. "Disposed of," BTW, means sold into private ownership.
http://www.minnesotalegalhistoryproject.org/assets/1780%20Resolution%20on%20Public%20Lands.pdf
The lands in question were in the NW, with multiple states having overlapping claims. All claims were ceded to the US, to be used for the benefit of the US as a whole, not for any individual state, including newly formed states within those territories.
Thanks for bringing this support for my position to my attention!
Thank you for you patience with this discussion Sherman Logan.
What dictionary defines “disposed of,” the term used in the Resolution of 1780, as being sold into private ownership as it relates to that resolution?
Webster’s Dictionary defines “disposed of” as transferring control to someone else or getting rid of something. So I don’t see where a sale of land to private ownership is an issue when states cede (give up) land to the feds, or the feds dispose of (transfer control) of land to a new state, the spoils of war to a state in the case of Nevada, to a new state.
Again, since I haven’t been shown evidence for either eminent domain or the Constitution’s Clause 17 of Section 8 of Article I with respect to the “federal” land in question, I want to know the federal government’s constitutional basis for controlling land in Nevada. And if the land wasn’t disposed of when Nevada became a state in compliance with the Resolution of 1780, then why wasn’t it disposed of?