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

lCiSh SotbpcutiOn. III IL DC Sdiu tndt t1C
navigation act is founded in national
policy and lhat it is essential to national
defence aM independence, we admit it
But we answer, IN the first place, that
Congress could not exercise power moi
granted, merely because il might be USE
ful or necessary: and in the second
place, we say that the same remark is
true Of the policy Of protecting manu-.
lactures That policy, also, is essentia
to national independence. Iron, hemp
and clothing for sailors and soldiers
are not less Indispensable to ma
tional defence than ships and seamen.
Not only in the general use Oflanguage,
then, does the power OF laying duties
and regulating trade extend to the pro-
lection, by the use of such means, OF
domestic manufactures, but such has
been the constant Interpretation Of the
constitution itself.
We think indeed, that when gener-
al power is given to Congress by the
constitution Of the United States, in plain
unambiguous words, their acts are con-
stitutional and valid, if they are within
the scope of the granted power; and,
that, in considering the validity Of the
law, the motives OF the Legislature can
never be investigated. Having granted
the power, with such limits expressed as
were thought proper, its exercise, within
those limits, is left to the discretion oi
Congress.
What is the true character Of the op-
positc doctrine, 1t is, that the constitu-
tionality Of law depends, not on its pro-
visions and enactmcnts, but on the mo-
tives of those who passed it. Is not such
notion new? How are we to ascertain
the motives of a Legislature? BY pri-
vate enquiry; by public examination; by
conjecture? The law may be passed
on mixed motives: some members voting
for revenue; some for projections; or one
house may act with one view, and the
other house with another. What will
be the character Of such law?
According to this new theory, if tho
motives be constitutional then the act IS;
if the motives be unconstitutional then
the act is unconstitutional also. 1t fol-
lows, therefore, that law passed by one
Congress may be constitutional, which,
if passed by another, though in the
same words would be unconstitutional.
Besides, on this theory a law may be
Unconstitutional for its omissions as well
as its cnactments: because, in laying
duties, articles may be omitted as well as
articles inserted, from design to favor
manufactures.
We may pursue this inquiry step far
thcr.
In order to ascertain whether an act
were passed primarily for revenue, the
constituting power must be authorized to
inquire whether that revenue be necessa-
~. For if it be conceded that Congress
has constitutional power to raise an in
definite amount Of revenue, such con-
cession will cover any system Of imposts
that may ever be adopted. The right to
raise more revenue than the expenses OF
government require, implies the exercise
of a power to tax under circumstances in
which the raising of revenue cannot be
primary purpose, but in which purpose
to protect industry, or, in other words,
what has been called the incidental OBJ
iect, may be rendered, in effect, the Prln-
cipal object Of the tax, although veiied
under the revenue power. For these
reasons we say it follows as an inevitable
consequence, under this view OF the
source of the protective power, that the
constitutionaIity Of any system OF lmposts,
processing to be directed to revenue,
must depend upon the fact whether that
revenue be necessary to the government
or not.
The statement of such consequence
is sufficient to show what endless difficult
ties must cmbarrass the operations OF the
government in defining the limits OF tins
incidental protection, which has been al
legged to be the only protection, that 'he
constitution allows, and Of itself affords,
what we conceive to be, an unanswera-
bic argument against referring the right
TO protect industry exclusively TO tna'
clause of the constitution which authoriz-
es Congress to lay imposts for the Pur-
poses ofrevenuc.
To determine whether any proposed
amount Of revenue be necessary, would,
in great number Of cases, prove iruit-
ful source of vexatious and unprohtah)e
controversy. One party II
wise to improve the face Of their terrific
ry with expensive roads and canals, to
provide Notifications and the munitions o'
war, and to accumulate treasure IN the
exper,ation Of national difficulties, woulo
find good reason to maintain that iarg'
revenue was indispensable to the nation
With this party high and burdensom'
rate ofimposts, fully adequate to the mos
extensive protection Of manufactures tina
has been asked for, would be const'tu
tional application of the revenue power