The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1829-01-07


proInlscuous use of terms and phrases, diff
! ferng in their shades of meaning, (alway.
} to be eXpounded with reference to the con
) text and under the control Of the genera
, character and manifest scope of the instru-
ment in which they are found,) are to be as
crlbed, sometimes to the purpose Of greater
: caution; sometimes to the imperfections ot
language, and sometimes TO the imperfec-
ton of man himself. In this view of the
subject, 1t was quite natural, however GER
talnly the general power to regulate trade
might include a power to impose duty or
it, not to omit it in clause enumerating the
several modes ofIeVenue, authorized BY the
Constitution. In few cases could the " ca
najOfi cGuteIa" occur with more claim to
respect.
Nor can it be inferred, that a power to
regulate trade does not involve power to
tax il, from the distinction made in the
! original controversy with Great Britain be-
tween a power to regulate trade with the
/ Colonies, and power to tax them. a
! power to regulate trade between different
parts of the Empire, was confessedly neceS-
Sary; and was admitted to lie, as far as that
was the case, in the British Parliament; the
taxing part being at the same time denied
| to the Parliament, and asserted to be neces-
sarily inherent in the Colonial Legislatures,
as sufficient, and the only safe repositories
OF the taxing power. So difficult was it,
nevertheless to maintain the distinction in
practice, that the ingredient of revenue was
occasionally overlooked or disregarded in
the British regulations, as in the duty on su-
gar and Inolasses imported in the Colonies.
And it was fortunate that the attempt at an
internal and direct tax, in the case of the
AIT
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 OBJ
ject ofthe Parliamentary regulations oftrade
with the Colonies was the 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 a
peculiar, complicated, and, in seyer.l re-
spects, of an underlined character 1t is a
simple question under the Constitution OF
the United States, whether the power to
) regulate trade with foreign nations" as a
distinct and substantive item in the enumer-
ated powers, embraces the object Of encou-
raging by duties, restriction and prohibi-
; tons, the manufactures and products OF the
country !? And the affirmative must be In
ferred from the following considerations
$ l. The meaning of the phrase to "regu
. late trade" must be sought in the genera
use of it /; in other words, in the objects t.
which the power Was generally nnderstoal
to be applicable, when the phrase was III
serted in the Constitution.
S 2. The power has been understood ant
used by all commercial and manufacturing
nations, as embracing the object of encouF
aging manufactures. 1t is believed tha
not single exception can be named.
3. This has been particularly the case
with Great Britain, whose commercial vo
cabulary is the parent of ours. A primary
object of her commercial regulations is vel
known to have heen the protection anG
encouragement of her manufactures.
H. Such was understood to be IA proper
), use of the power by the States most prepar-
ed for manufacturing industry, whilst re-
tanning the power over their foreign trade.
5. Such cause of the power, by Congress,
accords with the intention and expectation
of the States, in transferring the power
over trade from themselves to the Govern
ment of the United States. This was en-
phatically the case in the Eastern, the more
manufacturing Members ofthe Coniederacy
Hear the language held in the Convention
of Massachusetts.
BY Mr.. Dawes, an advocate for the Con.
s:itGton, it was observed, sour manufac
lures are another great subject which ha:
/, received no encouragement by national du
! ties on foreign manufactures, and they
never can by any authority IN the old Con
federation" Again, "If we wish to en-
:, courage our olen manufactures, to preserve
I our own commerce, to raise the value OF oul
own lands, we must give Congress tint
power in question"
BY Mr. Widgery, an opponent: All We
hear is, that the merchant and farmer VII
f flourish, and that the mechanic and trades
f man are to make their fortunes directly, /
r the Constitution goes down."
The Convention of Massachusetts wa!
: the only one in New England whose de
! bates have been preserved. But it canno
be doubted that the sentiment there express
, ed was common to the other States in tina
quarter, more especially to Connecticut ant
Rhode Island, the most thickly peopled o
all the States, and having, of course, thei
thoughts most turned to the subject of manu-
! features. A like inference may be conf
IDENTITY applied to New Jersey, whose de
bates in Convention have not been preserv
cd. In the populous and manufacturing
state of Pennsylvania, partial account only
of the debates having been published
, nothing certain is known of what passed il
her Convention on this point. But ample
evidence may be found elsewhere, tina
, regulations Of trade, for the encouragement
of manufactures, were considered as within
: the power to be granted to the new Con
gress, as well as within the scope OF the ma
, tonal policy. OF the States south OF Penn
sylvania, the only two in whose Convention
the debates have been preserved are Vir
ginia and North Carolina, and from these