Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1820-01-04

controversies between tnosS SpfcIiSh pa ~
II is believed that such delicate and per-
haps dangerous delegation o power, is no
where 10 be found in that instrument, and
that both the letter and the spirit exclude the
implication of so important rust.
While il is evident shat controversies must
sometimes arise between the national & state
goyernm ents as to the extent OF their powers;
it is believed thas so long as the patriotism OF
the people (the only permanent foundation
of republican Institutions continue, tue for
mer will find its security, not only IN the
great strength and resources which itrossess-
es, but in deep sense throughout the ma
ton of connected interests and common dan
ger and that the latter will be protected
by the identity of rights belonging to the
state soyereignties, and the redeeming con-
troll which they may exercise, through the
medium of their legislative bodies. in ex-
pounding and amending the constitution.
The General Assembly regret that an oc-
casion has occurred which calls upon them to
perform the painful duty Of declaring. that
the federal government has transcribed its
constitutional limits by an important and un-
warranted assumption Of power The act Of
Congress which establishes the bank Of the
United States cannot be admitted and has
never been admitted by the Legislature of
Virginia to be authorised by the constitution.
They have hitherto been silent on the subject
of that act, from motives which it is unne-
cessary here to detail but late solemn de-
cision in the highest judicial tribunal of the
United States having asserted the validity
thereof, on principles which would equally
sanction the most daring usurpation of rights
reserved to the states, the interpositon Of
the general assembly is imperatively requ-
ed. not only to prevent an injurious misap-
prehension of their sentiments, but to seek
an adequate security against recurrence
OF the evil. They at the same time disclaim
any desire to impair the rights of property,
or to invite resistance to the law afore-
said.
That the government Of the United States
is one of limited powers, is on all hands adj
mitted !; and il is equally clear that it pos
sesses no further powers than those enume-
rated in the constitution, all other powers be-
ing expressly reserved to the states or TO the
people. The powers granted to Congress
being, from its confirmation, legislative, and
the physical execution thereof by that body
in the nature of things impracticable, il ne.
cessariy follows that Congress would have
The right TO pass laws for the execution of its
powers, without any express provision in the
constitution to that effect. But those laws
could not be proper or valid which instead of
being restricted to the execution of mower
granted, should prescribe the exercise ola
power not granted. The most cogent rea-
sons and highly respectable authorities prove
that by the Sd art 9Th sect 18th clause il
was not intended to enlarge the powers pre-
viously enumerated as granted to congress
nor is it believed that there is in the Ian.
guage of that clause which gives to Congress
the right of passing laws for the erection Of
corporations.
Hhere various measures present them
selves Tor the execution of power granted,
IT is not denied that Congress may exercise
Its discretion in selecting those which may
be considered necessary for a complete and
beneficial execution Of the power but this
discretion, which of course involves a mere
question Of expediency, must be limited by
the restriction. that the measures selected be
proper, that is appropriate, or in other words
be strictly confined to the execution ola DOW.
er granted. Whatever may be the usual sig.
MITIGATION OF he word proper" It is be-
lieved that il must bear the meaning here pi-
ven to it, when applied TO the execution Of
a power and couples with the word necessary,
That law be appropriate is therefore
not matter of discretion, but limit of
power, beyond which Congress cannot pass,
without travelling out OF the constitutional
charter.
When the law in question is brought TO the
test above mentioned. it will be found not TO
be an appropriate measure for the execution
OF power granted, but the exercise of a SUBJ
slantive power, from which some incidental,
uncertain, and occasional benefit may be ex-
pected in the exercise of one or more emu