The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-09-19

the Supreme Court 10 enforce eompacts contemplated by
the senator But then would arise serious dhculty
how is the execution to be levied Suppose Illinois 10
be the recrean party Tor aught see, must be LEVIED
on the body OF her senators and then he would be likely
10 find home somewhere else Than the White House
But there is sn another objection, The senator
proposes that Congress should give It's consent in
advance to levy OF tonnage duties by the author-
ties OF cities or towns-by single States, and by a
combination OF States. Now, | insist that the con.
sent TO be given by Congress 10 the levy OF any
duty OF tonnage by State must be subsequent TO the
act making the levy The clause referred 10 supposes
the legislature OF State TO have passed act for the
purpose indicated il supposes that to be submitted TO
Congress, and then IN effect declares that il shall become
valid on being approved by that body. The constitution
does not contemplate the granting OF general power OF
attorney 10 all the States of the Unon but law is to
be enacted in the first place. for definite object and that
something tangible, and would be able TO decide whether
is or is not such law should go into operation
deny That we have right 10 hre into the air on such
subject as this regardless OF consequences; but
to level deliberations al precise object, and then
we shall know what we are about
But the senator spent much time in producing here
10 the levy of tonnage duties by the States presume
senators did not fail 10 note the fact that every of
these precedens was case OF assent subsequent 10 the
passage OF the law and not in anticipation OF 1t.
Mr.. DOUGLAS | wish TO state distinctly that such
is not the case hold in my hand acts giving the
sent OF Congress to original acts passed by State egs
also TO amendments which the State might thereafter
make In respect to the last the assent of Congress
given in advance, and not subsequently, thereto.
MIR. SMITH. 1t is very possible the senator may find
Of that character do not pretend to have looked
into the Legislation OF Congress this subject have
merely followed the senator in his statements and every
senator knows that nearly all the cases presented were
those OF subsequent assent 1t possible that law
may have slipped through in the nature of prece-
dent but venture to say i did not receive any serious
consideration apprehend that the senator cannot pro-
duce here legislation sufficient 10 show that there has
been any ea substantial construction of the constitution
in conformity with his views l maintain fearlessy,
OF a IN ala
gress to give its assent; why not? How can Congress
assent, unless we know what we are asserting to! |
bold il would be in the last degree ndiscreet for Congress
to confer such vast power on the States, without re-
strlcon or hmitaton-to authorize them to undertake
any improvements they please, and TO prosecute them
they please. The cases produced by the senator show
how cautiously Congress has acted on this subject In
every instance the consent of that body given only
tor limited period, and ordinarily for very short PEE
power Of attorney to all the States 10 undertake these i'm
proyemenls at their discretion, and to levy tonnage du
ties within the limits prescribed in his amendment, for
any and every object they please and this power Is 10 be
continued for all time TO come.
Mr.. DOUGLAS | will refer the senator to act for
an lnlimiied period Of time. if he wishes it,,
has expressed himself fully on this subject should keep
his seat for while. believe have the floor, and am
unwilling TO be interrupted.
Mr.. President, suppose must that the seDa-
tor from illinois did moi comprehend the OF my
marks am quite certain every other member OF the
Senate did. attribute nothing 10 the senator. put
dersood to be the substance of the Legislation OF Con-
gress this subject derived from the representations
OF the senator made here.
But, sir is very possible that the senator may pro-
duce single instance OF assent precedent and possibly
some other instance OF assent for unlimited period.
but claim that the whole current OF legislation has been
the other way The practice has been restrict the per
mission given by Congress 10 very short periods and
maintain that is Of The highest consequence The
try that it should be But let the senator il he can
produce precedent for proposition such the
before
Congress knew what State about do, 20 far from
assenting il would absolutely forbid it. Perhaps Con-
gress might deem some enterprise Of this sort quite the
reverse OF an improvement, and perhaps other States
might come here and demonstrate against it.
Suppose, Tor example the States of Kentucky and In
diana to enter into arrangement TO repair the
Cumberland dam, and to levy tonnage duties for that pur
pose what commerce would they levy those duties
Why, sir, on the commerce of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and
Virginia, as well on tina; OF Kentucky and Indiana
Now should not the citizens OF the three States ss
named have opportunity 10 be heard the question:
whether the dam would be OF any use, and whether a
burden should be laid their commerce The States
may If invested with general power, undertake i'm
proyements 10 the last degree mpfoyident-they may
derlake improvements which conflict with each other,
which are incapable OF execution or il executed,
than nothing.
The senator denouncss in broad terms, all that the
general government has done the Ohio river. Ii /
mistake not, he insisted that the works there little
better than nusances. How he expect higher or
better administration OF these great interests by the sepa
rate States | mainaiu that IT is highly nexpedient Tor
channels OF communication. II is easy 10 see that coils
ions would arise from the system proposed between the
different States, and the whole subject would be thrown
into irreirievabe confusion.
But there is another provision OF the constitution
which should arrest the attention of The Senate being
the sixth clause OF the same section, as follows:
Nor shall vessels bound and from State be obliged
to enter, clear or pay duties in another"
How can the senator carry out his scheme without
violating this clausel Suppose wheat grower OF Hi.
nois should load vessel with produce al Alton, and
send II 10 New York, the mouth OF the Mississippi
can Louisiana, consistently with this provision compel
him To pay tonnage duties to deepen the channel the
mouth II is obvious that il would be very unjust as
poses, and maintain that II would be equally unconsti.
tutional.
But there are other difficulties in the way oil the sena.
tor. His scheme is volatve OF the fourth article OF the
ordinance Of 1887 which provides that
"Tbe naygabe waters leading into the Mississippi and
ST. Lawrence and carrying places between the same, shall
be common highways and forever free well the in
States and those any other States that may be admitted
into the coniederacy, without any tax, imposr, duty
therefor
And il is equally volatve OF compscts entered into
between the United States and the several States situated
on the Mississippi and the lakes when they were re.
speclively admitted into the Unioa thus by the act for
the admission OF Louisiana, April s, 1872 it is provided
"a condition that the river Mississippi and the navi-
gable rivers and waters leading into the same, and into
the Gulf Of Mexico, shall be common highways well
10 the inhabitants of said State. the inhabitants OF
other States, WITHOUT any tor, duty impost, toll
therefor imposed bg the sad State" Similar compacts
are contained IN the act OF March l. 1917, for the add
mission of the State OF Mississippi in the act of March
.. 1920 for the admission Of Missouri in the act Of June