The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-08-22

language this act Of the President and bestows spoL
southern politicians, particularly Mr.. Calhoun, libe
raj and most severe censure.
The Courier says: at is our opinion that the re-
lection OF Mr. Calhoun's bill by the House has had
| some influence in the matter" We do not believe
so. On'the contrary think that if both bills had
been presented for the Presidents signature at the
same time, he would have withheld it and returned
both bills.
The Courier adds: "We had supposed from the
principles laid down In the celebrated Memphis res
buttons, that more liberal views were coming to
be entertained at the south" Now, it was the very
liberal views put forth by the Memphis convention,
OF which Mr.. Calhoun was president which at the
time alarmed US, and which we believe were gene
rally looked upon, especially at the morrill, as fore
| bOding evil Ii looked to us as though the south,
feeling that due share of the public money had not
been expended at the south and west determined
hereafter to go into a scramble with the north for a
portion and il possible the larger portion of the pub.
c treasure for the improvement OF their rivers and
harbors. IL seemed as if the old landmarks Of the
constitution were, by common consent, to be thrown
down, snd that both parties and all parties, from
Maine to the Rio Grande had come to determination
to plumber the treasury and the people for the benefit
Of localities. These "liberal views, which the Cou-
rler would seem 10 commend, have no warrantln the
constitution. They stand repudaIed by those prln-
ciples of republieanism which gave birth TO the
democratic party under jefferson in 1900. We
the constitution is compact among sovereign
States, and that all power not expressly granted on
the face ofthe instrument tsefis reserved TO the peo
pie and the States II is plain to every man who will
read the constitution that there is express grant
IT power TO Congress make these large approprl-
atoms Of the public money for local purposes IN the
several States.
The President, looking steadily at the constitu-
uon, says that he can find no authority in that in
strument which will Justify him under his oath of
office in signing the bill He SO understands the
constitution; and, as "Old Hickory" was applauded
by the people for constituting the constitution he
understood it another great occasion, so we trust
asd believe that "Young Hickory" on this occa-
sion will be fully justified by the same people.
Disregarding presidents and the screeches of local
tues, ;" as our friend Hoffman would say, he has
honestly, and with frmness OF purpose worthy of
all praise, done his duty to the country. He has
taken care that the republic should receive no deri-
ment al his hands.
But President Jackson and President Van Buren,
signed similar bills SO they did, and also bills
sanconing the principle of protective tariff, and
Mr. Madison signed the bill chaTterins bank of
the United States IN 1916. We trust, however, that
the Courier and Pilot would be quite as unwilling
ourselves to support either Of those measures at
This time on the score Of precedent
The bill vetoed by the President makes thirty one
appropriations different points or places all north
Of Mason and Dixon's line. How many were con-
House, we have not now the means Of ascertainng.
But suppose that both Of these bills had passed and
received the Presidents signature, who would I'M
dertake 10 calculate the number of applications
which would hereafter be made for similar appropri-
atoms, or the amount thereof What amount would
interested localities upon the Mississippi and its
tributaries, upon the Gulf Of Mexico and the rivers
falling into it, deem sufficient We venture to say
that, by disreputable scramble, and by a system
Of log-rolling in Congress, the number of applica-
tons and the aggregate amount thereof, would far
exceed any calculation that could be made, and in
the language of the President the TREASURY Of the
world" would be inadequate to supply the amount.
But have further objections to these appro-
prlations. Admitting the power Of Congress TO
make these expenditures, we hold that the money
should be contributed by the capital and not the
labor Of the country. Let direct tax be proposed,
and venture 10 say there will be little danger OF
any unnecessary appropriations.
In free cosntry all taxes necessary to the COM
mon veal should be graduated upon capial-upon
wealth and not upon labor. This principle is ad-
hered to by the State governments, while the ma.
tional government would seem to have adopted the
policy Of the British government during the pre-
miership of the younger Ptt-viz: that all taxes
should be imposed in the indirect form. We admit
hat it il expedient that taxes for the ordinary ex
penses OF the national government should be i'm
posed in this form. But we maintain that it is re-
pugnant TO every principle OF justice and liberty 10
gather immense sums under this unjust system OF
taxation, to be expended in the improvement of
rivers and the construction Of harbors throughout,
we had almost said, our boundless country.
Under the bill vetoed by the President it is pos
sible that the State of New York may have had her
share of the plumber so far appropriations within
her limits may be considered as her share But
how will it be in future, when the multitude of ap-
plicatons along our great rivers of the west, the
Gulf of Mexico, and even from the coast Of the
Pacific ocean, shall have found their way to Con-
gress' Indirect taxation, by means of duties on i'm
ports, may then be found insufficient to pay the APP
preparations required.
Among the few democratic members Of Congress
who supported the Presidents veto, we perceive the
name of that plain, unpretending, honest democrat,
Martin c. Grover, Of Allegheny county. He has
dared to stand by the side of the President in de-
fence of the constitution and the rights of the peo-
pie. He will be remembered