Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-02-13

y
complished, without the assertion or assumption
of the power which was now claimed. And Mr.
5. said, that he saw no reason for abandoning
system which had, both in war and peace, been
productive of So much benefit TO the people and
peace between the two Governments.
viii now proceed, said .lfr. S. to the argu-
ments urged on yesterday, by my friend from
Delaware, (.Ir. .lcLaue,) for whose Judgment
and opinions entertain such high respect, that,
when differ with him upon any subject, l am
induced to doubt the correctness of my own
opinion, and to examine it with more than or
binary care. He had done so in the present
case, and the result of his deliberate and best
judgment had produced no change.
The gentleman from Delaware considered
the power ofnai<ing Internal improvements, as
resulting from that clause in the constitution
which gives Congress authority TO regulate
commerce with foreign nations, and among the
several States.
.Nr. S. said that he would attempt to show
that this clause gave no such power.
This power to regulate commerce, the gentle
manfro Delaware contends, gives, not only the
authority to cut canals and make roads, but to
do every thing which shall tend to facilitate and
advance the commerce of the country; render
1 efcciuat and carry it on. The object of Civ
ing this power to the General Government he
argued, was not, as had been supposed, to pre-
vent the imposition Of duties, &c. by the State
Governments, because the constitution contain
ed direct prohibition upon the States from lay
ing any lmposts or duties on imports or erp3rtS.
He contended, therefore, that the right of regu-
lating commerce must have been given for the
purposes which he supposed, or the power would
be dormant and inoperattvc This argument,
Mr.. s. said, was ingenious, but fallacious. 1t
was true that the constitution did contain the di-
rect prohibition which the gentleman had alluded
to, but il did not prove that the main object in
giving the power to regulate commerce between
the States, was not to protect the States from the
hnpositions of duties, sc. by each other.
1t would be remarked, Mr.. S. said, that the
power to regulate commerce was an affirmative
grant to tie General Government, (among
many others) in the 9Th section of the LIST arti-
ole ofthe1constitution. This power was not bv
the express words of the grant, exclusive, and
therefore the States retain, for some purposes,
concurrent power, as to commerce, within their
own jurisdictions. To prevent, however, any
difficulty as to concurrent powers between the
two Governments, on the sub ect of duties &c.
the prohibition upon the States, as to duties, &C.
was, in abundant caution, inserted. This pro-
hibition is found in the 10th section, which con-
tains general ncgation of powers as to both
Governments. o..
Mr. S. said, that this was the case with many
other powers-take, for Instance, that to sscon
money!" or grant ''lettcrs of marque and repri-
SAL" These powers are given to Congress in the
9th section. Yet, the tenth section declares,
that mo state shall coin money, or grant lettesr
of marque and rcprisal.n Itwas done to show
that there was no concurrent pjwer remaining
with the States, as to these particular subjects.
There was nothing then, MIR. S. said,
in the constitution, which forbid the idea, that
tins power OF regulating commerce was mainly
intended to prohibit the State from laying duties
and lettering the commerce of the Union by i'm
| proYidcnt restrictions and stale regulations. He
would endeavour to shew to the Committee.
before he sat down, that this was the great NOV
ing consideration, in giving the power to the
| General Government to ''regIlL1te commerce be-
toeen the States" In doing this he said it would
be cessary to have recourse to the existing cir
cunstances under which the constitution was
formed, to the evils ntent.d TO be guarded a.
gainst, and the good to be obtained. Before the
adoption of the constitution, .Mr. 8. said, there
was strong and deep impression of the 7incon
venlences experienced under the confederation.
In relation to our foreign and internal commerce,
mnuncrable distractions were thrown in the
way by the State Governments. The want of
concert and ciashnc and dissirnilar views in the
States, called loudl for some remedy. He begged
leave to refer the Committee TO the first proceed
ings OF the Government which took place upon
this subJectof regulating commerce. As early
as the year 1878, New Jersey came forward and
made strong representation to Congress, object
ing to the 9th and 9th articles of the confcdera-
ton, which gave to the States the power of re-
guiating commerce, and urging the reasons and
propricty of ycsting i'll Congress the power of re-
gu!dtipg the trade of the United States, This
proposition was considered and rejected by a
vote OF ticO 10 one. In Feb. 1881, the subject
was renewed, and, again the proposition made
to invest Congress with the right OF a.egalating
! commerce, duties, &c. and was again rejected.
In the commencement e year 1888, acommit-
tee, consisting of mr.. Madison, Tr. Ellsworth,
and ,Hr. Hamilton, were appointed to prepare
, an address, to the states pointing out the defects
in the Confederation, and urging the propriety
ofgiving to congress the regulation of commerce.
&c.-This was done, and very able address
was presented, and adopted by Congress on the
26th April, 1888, [parts of which Mr. S. read.
From that period till January, 1875, the sub
Ject was repeatedly before Congress, and the
state governments, but nothing dehnitive wa:
! DONE In July, 1875, committee, consisting
OF HessIs. Monroe, Spaight, Houston and King
made very able report in favor of giving Con.
gress the power Of regulating the commerce o.
the United States, which was considered by Con-
gress, but not adopted, it being deemed
most advisable that all propositions for perfccting
the articles Of Confederation should originate
with the states. On the Both of November / 1856
mr.. Madison brought forward, in the House Of
Delegates of Virginia, resolution, empowering
Congress to regulate trade, &c. with a prcam.
bic stating the reasons why it ought TO be done
[extracts from which DR.. S. read. This pro-
position was adopted but the vote was after.
wards reconsidcred, and the report laid On the
table. In lieu of these resolutions, one was a.