The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1852-04-10

equal force and proprlety IN support OF grants
sought by other States for kindred under
takings railway from Charleston to Mem
| phis, or from Milwaukee to the Mississippi
a canal across Florida, forming a short cut
from the Atlantic to Mobile and New Orleans. or
across the narrow strip at the Sault Sic Marie:
these, or half dozen other projects, are per-
haps as truly national as the Illinois or Iowa
Central railroad, and are therefore, in our judg
ment as clearly entitled to aid from the ma
tonal domain. The only position we desire to
see established with regard toihese projects is,
| that they are bona .tfde national in their char
| acter-that their benefits will not be limited to
narrow localities, but will contribute their full
proportion to the stability and prosperity of the
Union. This proved, and we know not what
can be more properly entitled to assistance
from the National Government. The national
domain is the treasury from which the aid due
| to these improvements can be most conveniently
derived
Viewed in this light, what objection can be
urged to the course proposed, except that
which is urged to all Improvements by the
Federal Government? If the improvement Of
harbors and the erection of lighthouses, at pro-
per places on the Atlantic coast, be properly
within Federal jurisdiction, what improperly
can there be if the same Government render
help to Ohio or Michigan, in reference to light
houses and places of refuge on the lake coast2
Or what difference of principle is there between
the appropriation of dollars out of the Trea-
sury to improve the navigation of the western
waters, and the appropriation Of acres to open
and improve Wisconsin. Iowa, or Missouri? Or
can New England, or the Carolinas, have any
stronger right to receive aid coastwise, than
South Carolina or Tennessee can have to re-
ceive aid for the development of their internal
resources The principle is precisely the
same in all cases; and we can imagine no OBJ
lection valid in one case that would not be valid
against all. If the principle that the Federal
Government may consttutionally and usefully
employ portions of its resources in carrying on
great national Improvements be wrong, then
the entire body Of Improvements for which we
argue must be abandoned at once. But if, on
the other hand, the principle be sound and prac
ticabe, then can conceive of no limits to its APP
plication but those derived from the circumstances
and resources of the country. The principle can
only cease to operate when the work of national
improvement is completed. or when the means
with which the Improvements are carried on
are shackled or exhausted. Our contempora-
ries will scarcely contend that the Government
has done all that can be required at its hands,
and may now contentedly watch the results of
past eXeriions; nor will the most Responding
amongst them allege that grants of land to effect
works already projected are likely TO endanger
our national credit, to entail upon our citizens
the burdens of increased taxation. We, of all
nations, have least occasion TO be niggardly in
this respect. We have domain extended and
diversified beyond that of our most ambitious
rivals; and pride, duty, and interest conspire to
force upon US policy pregnant with greatness
and safety. We can deal literally with our
most distant citizens. and yet be just to all.
We can make gifts that would beggar empires,
and yet so regulate them that they shall serve
to increase our riches, and to bind together all
sections with the ties of a common prosperity.