The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-02-23

the great federal sun. | for one, sir, do not be-
eve so poorly of the power of truth over the
American people, as to suppose that such a
cause can be lost by their verdict. On the con-
trary, ] say to them, and to all who hear my
voice, that | conlure them in the language of
the dying Calhoun 10 his colleague, and bid
them ''never despond" Sir, they are few,
know, but perhaps not too few to stand in the
breach until others may come to the rescue
Let them do their duty for the day, and take an
appeal from the present to the rising generation
who may come to relieve them on the morrow
Sir, If were to dare to tell the dream of my
fancy, | should say that | seem to hear the dis
tanl tread of the thickening hosts who will rally
upon the defences which guard the rights of tho
States, and who will restore the Constitution of
the country-not, Sir, the Constitution as it is
now known in federal classes and degenerate
commentaries, but in all the rigorous simplicity
and purity OF its original creation
But, Mr. President, the Senator from Tennes-
see said that we had prevented this distribution
and opposed it, because we could nowhere find
in the Constitution the power of the federal gov
eminent to distribute money among the States
Sir, we could not find it and must cav that
he has not shown us where the power existed or
how it was to DO derived from that instrument.
And would say generally of his speech on yes.
terday, that it seemed more designed to unsettIe
the opinions of others than to fix or define his
own. He made long argument in favor of
distributions and yet he said he would not 90 for
it now, because he had some idea there was to
be a general war in Europe, and that we might
desire to take a hand in it, But as he well un-
derstood how costly this might be, he was dis
posed to exrend the federal treasure in fleets
and other military preparations. Therefore, he
said, he would not go for distribution now; and
yet he would vote for the amendment of the
Senator from Kentucky, which would certainly
make very vigorous commencement Of the
system, as it seems to mo- He said, too. If
understood him, that the new States were un.
generous and illiberal in claiming these grants
for themselves, while the older States could get
nothing, and thought was attacking the bill
with good deal of vigor. Yet after that ar
gument which he urged so earnestly, he con-
cluded by saying that he should vote for the
bill.
Now, it seems to me that, in some way or
other, his arguments and his votes have been
strangely mismatched; that is to say, if have
rightly comprehended his arguments and cor
rectly understood his declarations as to his votes
But, sir, he has accused us of opposing distribu
ton for the want of the constitutional power
to distribute money amongst the States. Before
that it devolved on him to show the existence
of the power. Has he done it? can he do it?
If it exists at a it is given by that clause of the
Constitution which gives Congress the right to
dispose Of the public property; and if claimed
for this purpose, it must be created as an indef-
mite grant Of power and so in times past it has
been treated. There is no other way in which
he can derive it, And yet, when you come to
apply tests to that proposition, that gentleman
and Others will shrink from it, All admit that .
you cannot dispose of the proceeds of the lands
for the establishment of church, or for creating
a nobility; because it is said the Constitution
prohibits such things expressly. concur with
this answer But does not the Constitution for.
bid us to exercise any powers which are not
granted to US in express terms or by clear i'm
plication? According to that instrument, all
powers not thus conferred are reserved to the
States. The power to give money to the States
is certainly not granted expressly or by implica-
ton anywhere in the Constitution unless it il
contained in the right to dispose of the public
property. Now there is no reason why this
power should be contained in the general right
to dispose of this property moro than any other
power. II you can infer this, you may infer !,
any other disposition of the proceeds for what
ever object with as much propriety, 40 that, ac-
c0rding to this construction, there is an indefinite
grant Of power, which would destroy the limita-
tons Of the Constitution itself
But according to our construction, the power
to dispose of the public property is not more
general than that of laying taxes, like the last,
is SO limited that il can only be used to carry
out the powers given by express grant or clear
impcation-in which list is nowhere to DO
found the right to distribute money amongst the
States Now which construction, Mr.. President,
harmonizes best with the Constitution, his or
ours ! submit it to the country to say. The
country has spoken upon this question hereto
fore, and decided against him. If tho right en-
lists to distribute money amongst the States,
which arises from sale of the public lands, it
also exists in relation to that which is raised by
taxation You cannot admit it in the one case,
and refuse it in the other, either in theory or
practice. Suppose you attempt to make tho
distinction. You refuse to distribute the
money arising from customs, but you invest it
in the purchase of the Louisiana or Florida ter
ritory. The lands thus purchased you sell again,
and the money thus obtained you distribute, at
tor it has gone through this process. And thus,
you do indirectly, what you said you could not
do directly. Sir, You cannot maintain the dis
tinc.ion between the right to distribute money
raised in the one case or the other If the
power exists in the one case, it exists also in
the other; and IT You exercise it in the one,
you will soon discover that the time is not far
distant, when you will exercise it as TO both.
What, sir, could be moro dangerous, than to
make the States dependent upon the bounty Of
the general government? Sir, we altered the
articles of confederation, because they made the
general government dependent upon the States
for supplies and shall we now reverse the
thing, and make the States dependent upon tho
general government, for the means of domestic
legislation Especially, shall we do SO on the
condition proposed, and what is that condition
The Senator from Kentucky has shown us
that it is to be done upon the condition of our
controlling the domestic Legislation of the
States, and perhaps in the end their county po-
lice. And what is to be the effect of distribu-
ting this property among the various sections of
the Union? What would it beget but the Bit
terest strife and most unwholesome agitation
How long, too, before such policy would bring
on conflict between the different classes of
society, in their anxiety to secure as much as