Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-03-06

The parent Of The srdiiion law. The reason
ing WAS this the power 10 "suppress insur-
rrctions" implies the power To- prevent them,
and the power I'D prevent them implies the
power 10 punish whatever may tend or lead
10 them -hhels upon the government tend
or lead Ia insnrr-clinns; therefore, Cungress
may pass a sediiion law for the punishment
OF iibrls.
The system of reasoning now employed ~
Justify the exercise of power contemplated
by this bin, is equally, and, indeed, 20 my mind
much more forced and arbitrary, in its chain
OF differences. What ~ il? The power to
regulate Commerce among the states aufho-
rizes Congress to remove Legislative restraints,
imposed by one state upon the trade Of ano-
fher, passing through its jurisdiction. The
power to remove legislative restraints, implies
the power 10 remove natural ubstructluns
and the power 10 remove natural distractions,
implies a power to give artificial facilities
or, in other words, to make roads aud canals.
But, is II true, hat the power To remove lrgis-
lafive restraints implies tho power To remove
natural distractions and TO give artificial facil-
lies The one aims only la protect COM
nerce in its actual channels: the other seeks
To open additional channels for commerce.
The object of the former is merely To secure
the free use of existing highways; the effort
Of the latter, ia 10 create aud construct new
81 essentially distinct, that an inference from
one to the other, is wholly arbitrary and in
admissible. Bat the hunurable gentleman
from Delaware need not be afraid that this
power will remain passive, unless ;is exer.rd
IN giving tiicial facilities To trade. Ii has
already been eXerted, and cupiously eXerted,
IN the various and minute regulations connect.
ed with the coastins trade, and this WAS pro
Badly the chief, it not The ooly, employment
of il, contemplated BIZ the trainers ofihe Con
stitution.
The gentleman read Il passage from Vattel,
TO- the purpose of pro, Ing the connection he
tween good roads and canals aud the welfare
ct trade. But nothing is gained by this posi-
non, which IS very readily admitted, until il
II also proved that Congress has 4 general
power To promote the welfare of Il 1de. TIE
application Of this authority, therefore, pro-
ceeds upon the assumption Of The very point
IN dispute. similar defect exists in the ar
g'ment which claims for the general govern
TueDt the same authority Ia make roads and
canal, between the STATES that the government
of each state has 10 make roads and canals
within its own limits. The state governments
have, undoubtedly, the right To make roads
and canals within their respective Limits but
from what does this right result From the
general discretionary power which the state
governments possess, To provide foI The, pub-
lie welfare. Before the argument can be sus-
ialnrd, then, II must be shown that the gene
raj government possesses a like discretionary
power, to provide Tor the public welfare. The
state governments do not make roads and
canals by virtue Of a sprcific power To regu-
late Commerce among the several portions Of
the same stale. If they possessed no other
power than this, il would NOT be competent
Tor them 10 make roads and canals
Much Reliance has been placed, by the gen
Tieman from Delaware, as well ~ other gem
iemen VINO have participated in his discussion,
upon what is said Ia have been the critical
construction Of the power 10 " regulate for
cign commerce." 1t is commended that Con-
Gress possesses the same power in relation to
"cominerc. among the several states" that il
does in relation TO :. foregn commerce :" and
that, rs, under the power nfregulating foreign
commerce, 1t has erected light houses, bea
cons, huoys, &c. with view To give safety
ana facility tn that commerce, il lr,ny, under
tue power of regulating commerce among
the states" construct roads and canals. to
give safety and facility 10 the internal trade Of
the country. beg leave Ia ask those gentle
men, by what authority they refer the erection
ht the lighthouses, bes icons. &c. Ia the power
10 regulate foreign cOnimprce2 There s no
evidence upon the face offhe laws themselves
which were passed for their erection, that
Congress Iegisiated under the idea that they
derived the right 10 erect them from the
power Z" regulate foreirn commerce. There
- collateral evidence, however. that they lp-
gsiated with re ference To another clause of
the Constitution. 1t vas mentioned bv nv
colleague, who opened this discussion, (Mr
+. L. Barbour that the statute book contain
sd list 0f cesslOns made by the several states
vi the SIZES for these buildings. The only
cSses in which tie constitution reonircs the
fs>rtI
OF territory, are those relating tn the seat of
government, and all such places as NAV b. ac.
CURED foT the erection Of forts, dock wards
SC and other nerdful buildings" It would
seem, therefore, from The formal cessiOns
made by the stats, Of sites for tight houses
&c. that G oDg e IS lrgisla'ed with reference 10
MS part OF the constitution. Another expla
nation has been s,gEpst'd. nv an honorable
gentleman from New York (Nr. Wood, who
refers the erection of these buildings to The
power 70 bay and collect duties. The duties
laid, accrue only upon the arrival in our ports
Of the goods ard vessrls charged with them
Whatever, therefore. gives security and G,ciIi
ryto an entrance inlO orr ports, has an iinme
dIaIe relation tn this branch Of the public rpye-
nue., have mentioned these PxpIanations |
only Tor the purposes Of showing that the rrpc
ton pf liglt-houses, hrarnus, Sc. can he nc |
counted for. and have been accounted Gnr !
phn"tiy nv least, without referring them fn !
The poser ofrrgulaIirG foreign commerce. II !
~ NOT necessary fur me In decide under what |
clause ni me Constitution these build ngs were |
erected. viii only say. that both of fbo ev- |
planatlnn' lusf mentioned art. az satisfactory !
u my mimi. rs the nnp which refers them 10
~" rowrr of regulating foreign commerce.
t'rntlenrn hive tatpn il for granted. without
Offering 10 prove. that they .,rre erected under
his clause of thu Constellation. for the sake. |