Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1825-02-03

sent Bank of the United States. The sanction
of Virginia to this latter measure, and her
CONSEQUENT abandonment of the rule of con-
struction, which she had formerly held, and to
which she has now again reverted, is inferred
no less from the unprecedented and uncensured
vote of both her Senators (Mr. Barbour and
General Mason) for it, than from the fact, that
a proposition to tax the Office located in
Richmond, was rejected by decided maJorl'
tv of her House of Delegates. With these
facts staring us in the face, can Virginia be
said to have "giventhe same meaning to the
words of the constitution, through all the Hue
tuations of the varying hour" Or is her con-
sistency better maintained, by reverting to the
early and experimental theories OF Mr. Jeffer'
son and Mr.. Madison, rather than to their SUBJ
seouent practice, bottomed on longer obser-
vation. and more varied experience : II, In
deed, nothing is right, but what bears the i'm
press of the last century-if consistency re-
quires return to the politics Of '9s and 's9, it
will not do to stop at the point indicated by
the Enquirer. The army, the navy, the for
ti6cations, nay the late war itself, must be de-
nounced; and the following resolution, of the
same legislature that adopted Mr.. Madison's
celebrated report, must become the index to
the present feelings Of the State:
Resolped, That our security from inudsion,
and the force of oar militia, render standing
army unnecessary; that the policy cfhe United
States forJids ,rar of aggression; that our
,ohole. reliance ought to be on ourselves: and,
therefore, that tchik we wiN repel invasion at
every hazard, sce shall deplOre and dtprecate
the epils of uoar, for euery other cause"
We need hardly ask, if any virginian ispre-
pared for this' We venture to assert, that
these sentiments, however honestly entertain
ed and decidedly expressed in '99, would
now find no advocate in the state; and We can
not help hoping, that the day is not far distant
when the constitutional doctrines Of the Rich.
mond politicians will be as unpopular as the
principles contained in this resolution.
We must now be pardoned for saying few
words in relation to the opinions which the
Enquirer has attributed to ourselves. We do
not, in the language of that paper, ego for
the crop"-we do not "stickle for every pow
er which we conceive calculated to promote
the general wefare."-we acknowledge the
government to be ga limited government,
with specific powers;" and the question is,
where those limitations are to be found This
is the point on which the Enquirer and our
selves are at issue. The editors ofthat paper
think the authority Of the government exhaust
ed the moment it barely executed its enume-
rated powers, no matter in how slovenly and
inefficient manner; and that the assumption
of every implied or incidental power, for the
purpose of more completely executing an emu
merated power, is violation Of the rights, Ell
ther of the states or of the people. We, on
the contrary, think that the enumerated pow.
ers were given for definite objects: such as
"the common defence, the general welfare"
&c.; and that until they have been 40 execnt-
ed as completely to accomplish those objects,
they have not been executed in the spirit and
the manner contemplated by the constitution
We accordingly think, that, among the va
rious modes in which an enumerated power
must be executed, the government has right
to select that which, in its opinion, involves
the least expense, and insures the greatest
degree of efficiency; and that, provided in
doing this, it abstains from those powers only
which are expressly withheld from itself, or
expressly given to others, the laws which it
may pass, will, in the language of the consti-
tuition, "be the supreme law Of the land, any
thing in the constitution, or laws Of any state,
to the contrary notwithstanding"
But we will endeavor to make ourselves
yet more ineligible, not only as to what the
government may do, but also as to what it
may not do. The government could not in
our opinions, pass any law, not specially au-
thorised in its enumerated powers, merely be-
cause it would promote '4he common defence
or the general welfare" It could not, for in
stance, with such view, pass law regulat-
ing descents, prescribing rules Of conveyance
between man and man, designating the duties
Of millers, keepers Of ordinaries, &C.; nor, In
deed, any other law within the ordinary
range of Legislative authority. Nor could it.
for any purpose whatsoever pass law de-
stroying the privilege of the writ OF habeas
corpus, creating bill of attainder, or "a title
of nobility, depriving a state of its right to a
full representation in either house Of congress-
or doing any other thing, either expressly pro-
hibited to itself, or authorised to be done ex'
clusively by another. But here its limitations
end; and no imaginary rights of the states,
growing out of either territorial jurisdic'
ton or general sovereignty, can alter or