Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1821-10-23
RICHMOND, OCTOBER 2s nor
" CO.MHO.N DEFENCE and GENERAL.
WELElREu

We must confess our astonishment at the
doctrines maintained by the Charleston Pa
trlot 1t is not one individual alone from
which 1T is his LOT to dissent 1T is not Mr.
Mndison's Report alone, which is against him.
i'ut we call upon him TO produce one single
authority, which he respects, that supports
his doctrlnc-wc DO not mean the authority of
names only, but an authority, enforced by ar
gument, recommended by the principles Of
those who advocate it in fact, upon any ac-
count entitled to be considered as sound ex-
posltor OF the true theory of the constitutions
lie may so back indeed to Mr.. Hamton's Re-
port on Manufactures in '91 ;or of committee
OF congress in '97,on the promotion of agricuI-
turc (which, Mr.. Madisons Report condemns. !
he may abide, if he pleases, by the outrageous
doctrines which were propagated in the hey-
day times fan Alien and Scdition law but
we will not take refuge in those times and
those principles.
The Charleston Patriot holds that, as the
States can do all that they are not expressly
proht61ted from doing, so, we contend. can the
Federal government that " our own argyll
mcnt is therefore, that the particular enumera-
ton of powers in the constitution of the u. s.
was never meant to limit the general phrases
TO provide for the common defence and gene
| raj wellare"-
10 enumerate describe the general divisions of
power was necessary Cor the competeness of The in
sunnent ms far ms such instrument can he render
cd complete by such enumeration To have en-
tered INTO this may have been necessary from the an
prehension ol the future denial TO the Federal authori-
" oil some OF the most important powers of govern
men, but that all the powers were not included and
only some OF the more general ones argues thai the
OILERS were onccled resulting or incidental on
": 10 nave mentioned some Of the incidental powers
might have been thought TO justify the inference that
they we're exclusive Of others PERHAPS euuay neces-
sary. We should suppose therefore that the nart;-
cuiar enumeration OF powers meant To confer an
undonhcd authority TO legisatc, and not 10 restrain
The powers oil legislation, and that il any part of the
constitution was intended To he limitary is that
which actually does prohibit CongIes ON the exer-
cise OF certain powers, which prohibitions in detail is
10 nc found an the entire 9th section of the LIST article
and IN the amendments. To sum iIp our doctrine then
we contend that under the general expressions " to
| provide for the common defence and general wei
fare Congress may do all that which tl,ey are not
prohibited from doing by the restraining clauses Of the
9Th section OF The LIST article the States are permit
ted TO do all that the constitution does not prohibit
them from doing by the similar clauses of the lob
section In this we claim for the Federal Govern
men the rule Reconstruction that is claimed for
| the States--and no more.
| Really we did not suspect that anv man was
prepared to hold such ultra federal doctrines as
these. We almost doubt whether even Alex
ander Hamilton himself at the height of poti-
cal contention ever went so far as this -1he
| thing Itself IS contrary TO common sense TO
the express constitution itself-to the best
ideas that ever were taken oft at any time
to all the views Of those who framed and Who
supported it, and to the people who adopted it.
Common ScnSe-Because, why sDeciju am
of the powers which were given, if all were
gwen An enumeration, instead of making
such an instrument complete, would serve Only
to weaken it. Is it not taking the very means
to lead TO a doubt and denial of these large
federal powers Who ever before heard, thai
the mentioning ofsome general powers takes il
all those which are not mentioned
IL IS contrary to the constitution itseIf-as
far as the emphatical language spoken by the
10th amendment can go. What! delegate al
Po,cers Ia very few only excepted land yet ex.
pressly say, that all not delegated are fcserv.
cd to the states, &c?
Who ever dreamt, save only a few ambi.
tious or lauatical men in the heydays Of fed
eralisu, that these exOrbitant powers wer,
given to the u. States ?-Has even the SUI.
| premc court approached within a hundred
leagues ofthis extension? Ii. they have IL they
have stretched this clause Of the constitution
so far it has thoroughly escaped us We
should deem the Judges as worthy almost o
an impcachmcnt--an unfit TO sit upon the
4 bench.
Go back TO the theory Of this constitution
at the fine it was framcd-and sec whether
it was not intended to DC a limited instrument
Coz conveying certain specified powers, and