Liberty advocate. [volume] (Liberty, Miss.) 1835-1866, 1838-07-21

Could State without violation of tht
Constitution issue such a paper? No one
will say so who admits the correctness 0
the decision in the case referred TO- |
not, why not? No answer can be given
But because they are bills Of credit. Fol
If they are not, the States may issue them
II these notes are not bills Of credit, de
mand to know what are? Give me def
milton which will not include these. Draw
a form ola bill credit which the States
may not issue. This clause of the Consti
tuition must have meant something. What
manner Of thing was meant by bills OF
credit, if these are not bills ofcredit? !
do not think that the argument can be an
swered. If then they are bills of credit,
has Congress power to issue them? II is
enough for me and the school of politi-
clans to which belong, that the power is
not to be found in the Constitution. am
accustomed to look there for the grant,
not for the prohibition Of powers. But
this case is infinitely stronger. The pow
err was inserted in the Constitution and
was stricken out by the Convention, and
under circumstances expressly refusing
the specific power itself On the 9Th of
August the committee which had been
charged with the duty ofpreparing Con-
stitution, submitted their draft to the Con-
vention. In that draft was the following
clause taken verbatim from like clause
in the articles of confederation: Soon
gress shall have power to borrow money
and emit UillS on the credit Of the United
States" On the 10th of August, mo-
ton is made to strike out the words ''and
emit bills of credit" and carried, nine
States to two. repeat that it is enough
for me that the power is not enumerated in
the Constitution, nor necessary mot con-
yenienD to any power that is granted
But how infinitely is this ground strength
ened when the power is not only found in
the Constitution as adopted, but was actu-
ally proposed and inserted, and afterwards
stricken out on motion and debate. BY an
opposite rule OF construction | demand to
know what power it is, that is not ex-
pressly prohibited that may not be AFRO
gated? The constitutionality Of a bank
has been we'll questioned on grounds inf
niteIy less strong, as | will proceed to
show. A proposition to give Congress
power to grant charters of incorporation
generally, was referred to a committee,
and never afterwards acted on. The pow
er TO grant charter of bank was never
proposed.
Now it may with much FEASIBILITY be
said that the convention refused to give
the general and dangerous power to grant
charters as an independent power, at the
same time believing that they had given
the power to charter bank as an implied
power, and as an auxiliary to granted pow
ers. But in the case of bills Of credit the
very power is specially proposed and re-
jected. The power to grant charters of
incorporation was not acted on by the con-
vention, and the power is now denied with
great reason from the non-action of the
Convention. But in the case Of bills Of
credit the question was distinctly acted on,
the power was inserted and was stricken
out on motion. How infinitely stronger is
the one case than the other. Why was
the power in either case refused? There
is no evidence in the case of bank, that it
was refused with an intent to deny the
power. But in the case Of Treasury notes
there is. Luther Martin, distinguished
member of the Convention, Immediately
after its adjournment, when all the facts
we're fresh in his memory tells the Legis-
lature Of Maryland that the words emit
bills Of credit were stricken out with the
view denying the power, and not because
it was given, if it became necessary as an
auxiliary power. He says, in his letter
to the Legislature of Maryland: "By our
original articles of confederation, the Con-
gress have power to borrow money and
emit bills on the credit Of the United
States; agreeably to which was the report
On this system as made b6 the comrittee
Of detail. When we came to this part of
The report, motion was made to strike
out the words ''to emit bills Of credit" a
gainst the motion we urged, that it would
be novelty, unprecedented to establish a
government which should not have such
That it was impossible to look
Onward into futurity, so far as to decide
hat events might not happen that should
'ender the exercise of such power abso-
utely necessary, and that we doubted,
if war should take place, it
would be impossible for this country to
lefend itself without having recourse to
,aper credit, in which case there would
70 necessity Of becoming prey to our
,nemes, or violating the Constitution of
ur Government; and that considering the
of the Government would
70 principally in the hands Of the wealthy,
here could be little reason to fear an
buse Of the power by an unnecessary or
INJURIOUS exercise Off,. Is