The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-08-04

ted States by the constitution nor prohibited by il To
the States, are reserved 10 the States respectively
or 10 the people" those who affirm the existence Of
any particular power, whether express or implied
must produce the constitutional authority under
which Il Is claimed and that authority should be
30 clear as TO leave reasonable doubt Of the
fact OF its existence, before It's exercise be JUS
| uhed; for the committee lay IL down as a sound
rule OF legislative action, that, in all cases Of vel
founded constitutional doubt il is safest ana wis.
est for all the funetionsries Of the government
TO abstain from exercising the doubtful power BY
| acting atirmatlyely, they would assume the ex'
ercise Of a doubtful power which may not exist
and may thereby exceed their authority, and pro
/ duee an infracton of the constitution. Have the
advocates ofthe particular power in question pro-
dueed the clear and undoubted constitutional su-
thorty under which il is claimed They all claim il as
an incident 10 some or other of the enumerated
granted powers, but have not been able to agree
among themselves TO which Of the granted powers
Il Is properly incidental. Ii is obvious, therefore
that il does not necessarily "appsrain to- "obvi
Ousiy fop from" either Of them. They may all be
executed and carried fully into effect without Its
aid. That clause OF the consultation in regard 10
the general welfare" has, il is believed, been very
generally abandoned, even by the advocates Of the
| broadcast construction Of the constitution, co.,
tanning no enlargement Of the specific granted pow
| ers. Have those, II Is repeated, who maintain the
existence Of this power, produced the clear and I'M
| doubted constitutional authority under which il is
claimed, or have they not, rather, al the same time
thathey differ IN opinion with each other regards
the sources from which IL Is TO be derived, by inpl-
cation and forced construction assumed its exercise
| without any practicable limitations and thus made
It principal power. nowhere 10 be found In the
! constitution
A construction Of the constitution so broad as
shat by which the power in question is defended,
tends impercepubly TO consolidation Of all power
| in government Intended by its trainers, and so
declared by the parties TO IT, TO be Of limited and
specific powers. ITO consolidate the States into one
sovereignty" says Mr.. Madison in his report before
referred to, nothing more can be wanted than To
supersede their respective soyeregntes in the cases
reserved TO them, by extending the sovereignty OF
the United States to all cases Of the general welfare;
that is To say, TO all cases whatever"
''That the obvious tendency and inevitable result
| OF a consolidation OF the States into one SOW
ereignty would be to transform the republican sys-
TEN Of the United States into monarchy, is point
which seems 10 have been sufficiently decided by
| the general sentiment Of America. In almost every
instance Of discussion relating TO the consolidation IN
question, its certain tendency to pave the way to
monarchy seems not TO have been contested. Th1
prospect Of such consolidation has formed the only
| topic OF controversy"
To guard. therefore, against the assumption Of
all powers which encroach upon the reserved
eighty Of the States and, consequently, tend to con-
sodaton, is the duty Of all the true friends Of our
political system. The assumption and the exercise
by the federal government, OF constructive and far
fetched incidental powers, are the passes through
which, II ever, our liberties may be invaded. In a
government like ours, there is less danger from
open enemy to our system, who unmasks himself
and boldly avows his purpose, than from the grad
ual, silent, and almost mpercepuble Entertainments
| by the federal government Our experience has
shown, il is believed, the continually manifested
propensity ofthe departments Of the general govern
ment to amplfy and strengthen its powers at the
pense Of the reserved sovereignues of the States.
And who can doubt, ifal the Incidental and con-
structive powers which have at different times
been claimed leach resting on worse foundation
| than the one in question: had been assumed and
exercised, that the whole character OF govern
ment would have been radically changed And
yet each, when considered separately and by ITSELF
did not seem likely to portend such consequences
The committee would not, il they could, excite any
unjust odium against the opinions Honestly enter
tanned, they have no doubt OF those who differ with
them regard to the existence and tendency Of the
particular power in question. Yet they must say that
| the general course Of reasoning by which the
power to pass the "aien lato," and also the
| "adiiion la,o," was defended, is substantially Of
the character of that employed to sustain the
power IN question: L.. this ~. illustrated according
to the rule which they have adopted a sound one
There is no express power granted IN the constitu'
ton authorizing Congress to pass either OF those
obnoxious laws. I, was claimed by its advocates as
power incidental to Of the granted express
powers necessary and proper to carry such
express power into execution. The power to pass
| the "dlien laio' claimed incident, by
committee Of Congress, in report to the House Of
| Representatives OF February 81, 1885, in the fol
lowing terms: 1.-THE right Of removing aliens, al
an incident to the power OF war and peace, accord
ing to the theory Of the constitution, belongs to thu
government of the United States" The power Il
pass the "sedition iaic'' was claimed by one o
the States in her response to the Virginia reso
lutions, in the following terms: "Whenever, there
fore, it becomes necessary to effect any of the OBJ
jects designated II is perfectly consonant to all JUS
RI rules of construction to infer that the usua
means and potcers necessary to the attainment o
that object, also granted" Thus, by corlstrtic
ton, the constitutional power to pass the seditio'
iaio" claimed as the particular power nov
in question is-as an incidental power-or
what is precisely the thing, the "usua
means and potosrs" necessary to the execution o
some Of the granted powers. 1t is true tina
the "ssdition iato" was a palpabe violation o
that article of the constitution which provides tina
Congress shall make no law abridging tn
freedom of speech of the PRESS; but that does no
change the nature of the argument by which thes
constructive and incidental powers claimed; for
was gravely maintained that the "sedition lac' wa
no ''abridgment of the freedom of speech or Of tn
PRESS" but punishment inflicted for the abus
Of this license. -
tbs no part Of the purpose or of the duty Of tn
committee, in this place, to discuss the constitution
atty of the ''alien and ssdon la,cs" Their objec
was simply to bring to the notice of the House tn
general reasoning by which the power to pass then
gravey claimed by their advocates as illustra
tive Of the danger of departing from the plain sens
+ and intention Of the constitution, and resorting t
vague constructions and irences, which to exer
else power. The moment we resort to these loos
generatles, on which to found powers, they becom
the chief principal powers restrained only by tn
discretion accidental will of Congress; render nu
gatory all the limitations of power in the constitu
ton. and make the government, in fact, one Of uu
limited powers.
There is no want Of patriotism or attachment
our free institutions among citizens but tn
great misfortune under which the country abors o
the subject Of internal improvement, is, the difficult
Of rousing the attention of our people to the greo
importance Of adhering to the written constitution
The usurpaton Of the power to pass the "niisn an
sedition ia,cs shocked the public points on whic
, they sensitive-the "berty of tho person. an
the "freedom of speech and Of the press" and b
one general sentiment it arrested, and its advo
Gates hurled from power. The Of the diferer