Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1831-11-24

4
that those very laws were originally passed, have
i all along continued, and now exist. They are,
therefore, countervailing laws, and 10 other, III
every just sense Of these terms.
II Having made these remarks on what IL con-
ceded by those who deny the power Of Congress
To protect manufactures, and on the effect Of that
concession, we proceed to present the view which
this meeting entertaiis the general constitutions
question.
;, by the constitution Congress has power 'to lay
and collect taxes, duties, imposts aud eAcises. -
II has power also ''to regulate conlnercc with
foreign nations"
N The power TO lay duties s accompanied by one
express qualification or limitation, which is, "that
! all duties shall be uniform throughout the United
| States" The power TO regulate commerce has
It's limitation aso which is, that no regulation Of
commerce shall give preference to the ports of
one state those Of another; and there s
another Limitation, which may apply TO both
clauses, namely, that no export duty shall ever DO
laid.
Here, then, is grant Of power in broad and
general terms, but W ith certain specific limitations,
carefully expressed. But neither Of these lnta-
tons applies, in any manner, to that exercise Of
the power which is now under consideration
Neither Of them, nor any other clause word in
the whole constitution mancsts the slightest i'll
tcntlDn TO restrain the words 50 Us TO prohibit
Congress from laying duties for protection. The
attempt is nothing less than TO add restriction
which the constitution has omitted. Who has
authority to add this! II other restrictions had
been intended they would have been expressed
When the business of limitation was before the
nyention, what was omitted was Is much an
exercise Of intention wha, was expressed. 1t
stated all the restraints on Congress which it in
tended: and to impose Others now would be, not
to interpret the constitution, but to change it; not
TO construe the existing instrument, but to make
another.
The words ofthe grant being general,
to lay duties and to regulate commerce,
their meaning is to be asccrtained by re-
ference to the common use and import of
language. No unusual Specification is
to be given to the terms, either to restrain
or enlarge their import. Congress, in
its discretion, is to lay duties and TO re-
gulate trade for all the objects and pur-
poses for which duties are ordinarily laid
and trade ordinarily regulated. If such
Il thing was never before heard Of as
laying duties and regulating trade with
u view to encourage manufactures, then
it might be said that the convention did
not contemplate such an exercise of the
power by Congress. But it was perfect
ly known to the convention and to the
people of this country, that one leading
object with all governments, in laying
duties and regulating trade, was, and for
long time had been, the encourage
ment of manufactures. This was em-
phatically true of England, whose lam
guage the convention spoke and whose
legal and Legislative phraseology was
theirs also. Every leading state of
Europe was, at that moment, regulating
its commerce for purposes Of this nature.
Such purpose, indeed, had been long
sought to be accomplished by some of
the states themselves, by their own re-
gulations of trade. Massachusetts, had
attempted it, New-York had attempted
it, Virginia had attempted it, and VIC
believe other states had done the same.
How Intellectual all their attempts were,
for want of union and a general system,
was soon seen and felt, by the whole
country; but they shew to what ends,
and to what uses the power to regulate
trade was understood to extend. But
not only in other nations, and in the
states, before the adoption ofthe present
constitution, as we shall have occasion
to show hereafter, but in the United
States since, and in the administration of
this very constitution, regulations of trade
have been made, in almost innumcrable
instances, with no view to revenue, but
with a sole and exclusive regard to pro-
lection.
If our understanding of the constitu-
ton be not according to its true meaning,
that instrument has been grossly yiolat-
cd from the very beginning. What are
all the registry acts; what the bouniics
on the fisheries, but so many avowed
efforts TO protect American Industry,
under the power of regulating trajc!-
On what foundation, does the whole
system Of the coasting trade stand =
The American ship-bmldor and ship
owner has enjoyed from the first, and
we think properly, not only protection in
that trade, but the monopoly Of it. lie
shuts om all foreign competition, aud he
does so on the grouud that the public
good is promoted by giving him this ad-
vantage We think he is right in ask
ing this, and the Government right IN
granting il. Yet this is not free trade:
it is prelerence;-it is protection, and
protection Of manufacture under the
7 power to regulate trade. The laws
giving this protection to the manufacture
! and the use of ships may be wise, and
laws protecting other manufactures may
be unwise. But the first cannot be con-
stitutional and the latter not constitution
al. Ifthere be power for one, there is
power for both. Both are drawn from