Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-03-16

M too
appropriation. were made and works commenced.
Ju't ssif no surveys were going Sir as soon as
Uncovered The true character of the survey BILL op
posed openly this floor and have since constantly
voted against all appropriations for surveys Sir as to
the system OF fnerna fmprovem my fret impress
sons against il fully confirmed very soon after
look my seat here, and Except in cases which
slider as exceptions from the general rue,) have uni
formly voted against all arprop iatons for Internal I'm
proyemens, against The Cumberland Road, the Chesa-
peake and Delaware Canal and all other works OF a sim
liar character But, sir, Il the South or the statesmen
OF the South, had committed themselves ever so deeply
on this sub ect does the gen,leah from
suppose, IL would afford any for their continued
support of system conducted principles which NOW
ancs,ly TO be as as ,bcv are
unequal and unjust? Surely not
The gentleman has male his defence for his conduct
in relation to TIE tariff of 1928. He considers the coun-
try being committed by the tariff Of 1924, to 90 on
with the system. Sir, wholly deny that the coun-
try is. in any manner committed, that Congress could
commit it on such subject, much less the support
Of rninious, unjust, and unconstitutional policy. But
how, il such a commuai were possible, could the i'm
position OF duty Of 20 80 per cent commit us To-
the imposition of duties of so or 100, The gentleman Is
mistaken in supposng that charged him with having
in 1920. denounced the tariff as "uftery uncon.tu-
tional; stated that he had called lite constitutonay
in question. ave now before the proce edings Of
the Boston meeting. TO which referred, and will read
them, that there may be nomi take the subject In
tie resolutions reported by a committee, (of which
MIR. w was member) IL was among other things
l. Resoired, That no objection ought ever 10 be-
made to any amount Of taxes equally apportoned and
imposed Tor the purpose of raising revenue necessary
Tor the support of government but that taxes imposed
on the pecpl" for the benefit Of any class of
The manufactured are equally inconsistent with
the prin' iples Of the Constitution and with sound
policy"
p. " Resolred. That, in our opinion, the proposed
ia in, and the principles which il avowedy found
ell. would, il adopted, have tendency, however dir.
ferenf may he the motives of these who recommend
them to G.mnish the industry, impede the prosperity,
and corrupt The mort Of the peopie"
In support cf anti tari.. 'esoutions (Which
unanimously adopted) Mr.. Webster said
Thore is a power in names; and those who had
pressed the 'ar on Congress and on the country, had
represented il as Immediately and almost exclusively
connected with domestic industry, and national indie
pendence. In his opinion, measure could prove
injurious TO the industry OF the country sad
thing was fancifu than the opinion, that ma.
ional independence rendered such measure necessa-
ry. He certainly thought it might DC doubted, whe~
Their Congress would not be acting somewhat gaiDst
;he spiri. and intention OF the constitutions in esercis-
ing power to control essentially the pursuits and
equations OF individuals not az Incidental to the exer
else OF aHv other power, but substantial and direct
power. IL such changes Were wrought incidentally
only, and were the necessary consequence Of such
mpost Congress for the leading purpose of revenue
should enact then they could not be com planned Of
But he dnnbed whether Congress fairly possessed the
power OF turning the Incident ino the princpal and
instead oil leaving manufactures TO the protection of
such laws should be passed with a primary regard
| to revenue, of enactng laws, with the avowed OBJ
Jet OF giving preference to particular manua
Sir, these good sound Carolina doctrines" and il
the gentleman finds reason TO abandon them now,---
we cannot consent 10 so with him
our AID 10 some Of the provisions of the
Farm OF 1928 What the fact? Not an amend
nrnt was put into that bill here which did not go
re"uce the duties. That bill to the Senate In
| form IN which il was known that it could not pass
Gen'lcIacn who would vote for il in that shape
ont rho wished it to pass called upon TO aid them
20 amending IL, 10 suit their purposes Sir, f we
lad lent our aid to such object. would have
served any fate that could have befalen us We pro-
ceeded throughout on the open and avowed ground of
hostility TO the whole system and acted accordingly.
To disprove my observations that the New England
members generally, did not support Internal Improve
ments in the West, before that memorable era the
winter Of 1895 the gentleman quoted two votes, in
1920, apd 1921 reducing the price, or extending the
time Of payment for the Public Lands Now sir the
only objection TO his authority is, that it has
nj relation TO the point in dispute. stated that New
England did not support Internal Improvements, as a.
branch OF the American System, before 1925. The
gentleman proves that on two occasions, they voted
for certain measures in relation 10 the Public Lands
measures which had always supposed, had been forc-
ed upon Congress by motives OF interest-bHt which,
whatever may have been fleir character, do touch
The point in dispute in the smallest degree. L think
this mode OF meeting my argument, however credita
BILE 10 The gentleman's ingenuity, amounts TO
acknowledgement, that il is unanswerable.
The gentleman complains Of his arguments having
been misunderstood, in relation consolidation.
thinks my misrepresentation almost mraculous, in treat
ing his argument in favor Of the consolidation
OF the government" Now, sir. what the point i'm
d.pute between us9 had deprecated the consolida-
iion Of the government. said not one word against
4" The consolidation Of the Union" l went further
and pointed out and deprecated Of the means, by
about.
gentleman eets up and attacks me and my argument
at every point, ridicules fears about CONSOLE
daon," and finally reads passage from a letter Of
Gen. Wasngton's, SITTING that of the objects Of
the Constitution, &" the consolidation of the u.
Mon" Surely, sir, under these circumstances, was
not mistaken in saying that the authority quoted, did
not apply TO the case, the point in dispute, was
the consolidation OF the government" and not of
Z" The Union" But, sir the gentleman has relieved
me from all embarrassment this point, by going
fully ino the examination Of he Virginia doctrines of
9S, anil while he denounces them giving us his own
views Of the powers Of the Federal Government,-
views, which, in my humble Judgment stop nothing
short Of the consolidation Of all power in the hands Of
the Federal Government Sir, when last touched on
this topic did little than quote the high author.
tiles, which doctrines rest-but after the elabo>
rate argument, which have just heard from the gem
neman from Massachusetts il be supposed that
can suffer them to 90 t. the world unanswered. I
enireat the Senate, therefore, 10 bear with me, wi lille
over as briefly possible the most prominent argu
rhents Of The gentleman.
The proposition which ! laid DOWN and from which
he gentleman dissens is taken from the Virginia reso-
uiions nf 49, and IL n these words, that in case OF
deliberate, papable and dangerous exercise by the
Federal Government, Of powers not granted by the
compact, THE Cons uon1 the States who pa rites
Thereto have right to nterpose for arresing the pro-
gre Of the evil, and for maintaining within their re-
specve limits the authorities rights and liberties an
pertaining 10 them" The gentleman insists, that the
States have right to decide, whether the Consfds
ton has been violated by acts Of Congress or not but
that the Federal Government is the exclusive Judge Of
violation Of The Constitution, however deliberate,
nall lie andd T.