Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1828-12-27

,luded duties, imposts, and excuses In another
clause 1t IS sald tax duties shall be laid on
exports, &c Here the two terms are used as
synonymous. And in another clause, where il il
said ''no State shall lay any impos,s, or duties,
&c. the terms impoStS and duties are svnony-
nous. Pleonasms, tautologes, and the promiscu-
ous use OF terms and phrases, differing in their
shades oil meaning, always TO be expounded with
reference TO the context and under the control of
the general character and manifest scope OF the
instrument in which they are found) are TO be as.
crbed sometimes TO the purpose Of greater cautions
sometimes TO the imperiections of language, and
sometimes TO the inperiection Of man himself. In
ms view OF the subject, il was quite natural,
however certainly the general pow err TO regulate
trade might include power TO impose duties on il,
not TO omit 1t in clause enumera,ing the several
modes oil revenue, authorised by the Constitution.
ln few cases could the s'ex-maiori cautela' occur
with more claim TO respect.
Nor can it be Inferred that a power 10 regulate
trade does not involve power to tax il, from the
distinction made in the original controversy with
Great Britain, between power to regulate trade
win the Colonies, and power TO tax them. A
power TO regulate trade between different parts
oil The Empire, was contessedy nccessurv; and
was admitted to lie, far that was the case i'm
The British Parliament; the taxing part being at
'he same. time denied to the Parliament, and as
serted 10 be necessarily inherent in the Colonial
legislatures, as sufficient, end the only safe de-
postories OF the taxing power. So difficult was it.
nevertheless, TO maintain the distinction in prac-
uce, that the ingredient Of revenue was occasion.
any overlooked or disregarded i'm the British regu-
iauohs, as IN the duty on sugar and molasses i'm
ported into the Colonies And il was ior,unate
mat the attempt at an internal and direct tax in
'he case OF the Stamp Act, produced a radical
examination OF the subject before regulation
OF trade with view to revenue, had grown into
an established authority. One thing at least is
certain, that the main and admitted object of The
Parliamentary regulations of trade with the Colo.
mes, was Inc encouragement of manufactures in
Great Britain.
But the present question is unconnected with
the former relations between Great Britain and
her colonies, which were of n peculiar, a comp.
Gated, and, in several respects, OF an underlined
character. Ii is simple question under the Con-
stitution oil the United States, whether" the pow
er 10 regulate trade with foreign nations as
disunct and substantive item In the enumerated
powers embraces the object Of encouraging by
duties, restrictions and prohibitions the manufac-
lures and products of the country. And the af-
hrmatve must be inferred from the following con-
siderations:
!. The meaning fthe phrase ssto regulate trade
must be sought in the general use of it, in other
words, IN the objects TO which the power was ge-
neraiiy understood TO be applicable, when the
phrase was inserted in the Constitution.
K Inc power has been understood and used
ny all commercial and manufacturing nations, as
embracing the object of encouraging manufac-
lures 1t Is believed that not n single exception
can be named
q. Inns has been particularly the case with
Treat Britain, whose commercial vocabulary is
the parent OF ours. A primary object of her com
mercial regulations is well known TO have been
the projection and encourag ement of her manu-
features.
4. Such was understood to be a proper use of
the power by the States most prepared for manu-
featuring industry, whilst retaining the power over
their foreign trade.
3. Such use of the power, by Congress. ac
CORDS with the intention and expectation of the
States IN transferring theipower over trade from
themselves to the Government of the U. States
This was emphatically the case in the Eastern.
the mere manufacturing Members of the Confed-
eracy Hear the language held in the Convention
OF Massachusetts.
BY Mr.. Dawes, an advocate for the Constitution.
IL was observed, "Our manufactures are another
" great subject which has received no encourage
" meht ny national duties on foreign manufac-
:" lures, and they never by any authority in
" the old Confederation" Again, IF we wish
9. 10 enconT0geoUf 0'on manufactures, to preserve
p" our own commerce, to raise the value of our
" own lands, we must give Congress the powers
" il: question.
ny Mr. Widgery, an opponent: "All we hear
- is, That the merchant and farmer will flourish
sc and that the mechanic and tradesman are to make
T." their fortunes directly if the Constitution goes
" down." et
The Convention of Massachusetts was the only
one IN New England whose debates have been
preserved But II cannot be doubted that the sem
states IN that quarter, more especially to Connec-
ucut and Rhode Island, the most thickly peopled
oi all me States, and having of course, their
thoughts most turned TO the subject of manufac-
lures. like inference may be confidently ap-
Piled to New Jersey, whose debates in Conven
ton have not been preserved In the popi,Ious
anu manufacturing State of Pennsylvania, a par
tial account only of the debates having been pub
ished, nothing certain is known of what passed in
her convention on this point But ample evidence
al= fl.or. n
ior The encouragement of manufactures, were con-
sidereu rs within the power TO be granted TO the
new Congress, as well within the scope of the
national policy. OF the States South of PennsvI
Vahia' The only two in whose Conventions the de-
oates nave been preserved are Virginia and North
Carolina and from these no adverse infercnces can
ne drawn. Nor rs there the slightest Indication
mat either vi the two States farthest South whose
Heoa'es III Convention, If preserved, have not
Deen made public, viewed the encouragement of
manufactures, as not within the general noyer
over trade 10 be transferred to the Government of
the United States
b. IL Congress have not the power il is ami
hiiated for the nation; policy without example
~ any other nation, and not within the reason of
The solitary one in our own. The example allud
ed TO, is the prohibition of tax on exports which
resisted from the apparent impos;ibty of raising,
10 mat mode, a revenue from the States, propor.
TONED to the ability TO pay 1.-THE ability OF some
Deing derived, IN great measure, not from their
exports, Dut from their fisheries, from their
lreights, and from commerce at large in some Of
JUS branches altogether external to the United
states; the profits from all which, being invisble
ana intangible, would escape tax, on esports-A
AK OH imports on the other hand, being Ga. on
which is in proportion TO the ability
d the consumers, whencesocver derived, was free
from that inequality.
Il lfrevenue be the sole object Of legitimate
mpost, and the encouragement of domestic articles
DC no! within the power of regulating trade. II
you'd ioiiow That no mOuopolizing or UNEQUAL re-
,niHons o! 90 eiEn nations could 90 co,,nteracfed.
"' Hal'ner te s.apie articles Of subsistence, nor
ne essential implements for the public safetv I'M