The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-08-28

his subsequent message Of 1908, in terms too ex-
plieit to be misunderstood and removes all doubt,
ambiguity, or obscurlty from the meaning ne IN
tended TO convey.
During the administration of Mr.. Madison,
bill passed both Houses Of Congress, AMI was
presented to him for his approval, which was re-
fused IL was a bill setting apart and pledglng
certain funds for constructing roads anu canals
and improving the navigation OF water-courses, IN
order to facilitate, promote, and give security TO
IN ernal commerce among the several States, ana
TO render more easy and less expensive the means
and provisions for the common defence. The
ground of Mr. Madison's objection TO the consti-
tutonality of the bill was, that il proposed to con-
struct roads and canals within the limbs OF tho
States, and not that Congress had no power under
the Constitution 10 appropriate money for works
OF a national character This may be considered
the origin of the distinction between the constltn-
tonal right of the General Government to make
improvements that entirely local. and within
the limits of the States, and those which gene
raj and national
Again: Mr.. Madison, in his message of the Sd
of December 1916, holds this language:
And particularly invite again their attention
TO the expedency ofexercsing their erisiing poices
and, where necessary, Of resorting TO the pre-
scribed mode Of enargng them, in order 10 effect
uate a comprehensive system of roads and canals
He here recommends to Congress the srpedi-
sney' of exercising the srising po,oers" which
they possess under the Constitution, 10 construct
roads and canals" Nothing is here left tn infer
ence; the power is admitted, and its exercise in
sisted upon, subject to the restrictions above set
forth, which are, that the road or canal must not
be confned to the limits Of particular State.
Mr.. Monroe, in his message Of December 9,
1918, declared il to be his conviction that Con-
gress did not possess the right to aid, by appro-
priations Of money, the construction of roads and
m he uot nj md IN
the distinction between general and local objects,
but at subsequent period, while discussing the
same question, he states that his mind had under
gone change in relation to the constitutional
power Of Congress upon that Subject, and that his
opinion then was-
"That Congress have an unlimited power to
raise money, and that in its appropriation they
have discretionary power, restricted only by the
duty TO appropriate il TO purposes of common de-
fence, and of general not local-nationa not State
benefits"
And this, in the language of General Jackson,
was avowed to be the governing principle through
the residue of his administration. Mr.. Monroe,
in thus explicitly defining the discretionary
power Of Congress under the Constitution, only
gave shape and form to the same distinction taken
by his predecessor, Mr. Madison. And here
assert, that the ground assumed by Mr.. Monroe
is the same occupied by the Democratic party
Jackson, in his celebrated veto message Of the
MaysviIle road bill, assumed precisely the same
ground taken by Mr.. Monroe; and after having
quoted the very words Of his message, he goes on
to say that
"a disregard of this distinction woulJ, Of ne
cessiiy lead to the subverson of the Federal sys-
tenn"
The ground upon which General Jackson rested
his veto Of the Maysville road was, that il was
a local work, and was confined within the limits
of single State The constitutional power of
Congress to make appropriations TO aid in the
construction of public works that are national in
their character, is conceded by General Jackson
throughout, and in every part of that able and
celebrated State paper. And his official approval
Of different bills during both his terms, all Of
which contained appropriations for works some
Of which would not, at this day, come within the
definition of nationality, as understood by the
Democratic party and, indeed, some of the sound
est Democrats of that day did not approve, as APP
pears by their votes upon those bills, Of the liberal
construction which General Jackson was willing
TO give TO the exercise of constitutional power.
As to works that might be considered national
there was at that early day greater diversity Of
opinion than exists at the present time, and indeed
diversity of opinion still exists. General Jackson
himself says, in the same message, What is pro-
pery national IN Its character, otherwise is an
inquiry which is often extremely difficult of solu-
ton" And when we consider that the practical
distinction between objects that were properly
national and those that were otherwise had not
been clearly defined at that time, il was not strange
that different minds should arrive at different con-
illusions. With General Jacksonis administration
the present policy Of the Democratic party had its
origin. And the course Of policy marked out in
his Maysville message, and which vas strictly
adhered TO during his administration Of the Gov
eminent, ripened into Democratic principle,
which has continued to be a cardinal point in the
Democratic creed from that period up 10 the pres
cnt time. In the convention that nominated Mr..
Van Buren, in 1910, che resolution defining the
position Of the Democratic party first adopted,
and has continued TO be re-enncted at every Ma
tional Democratic Convention up TO the present
time. The principle asserted by that resolution,
is the embodiment Of the policy announced and
promulgated by General Jackson, and, in my
judgment, expresses the true constitutional power
Of the Government TO make improvements, indi-
eating, at the same time, the only ssfe policy
der which the power can be exercised. Before |
give to that resolution the Interpretation to which
the history Of its origin entities it, and which It
droclams for itself, ] will examine more partcu-
arly the opinions Of its illusrious founder
While General Jackson was in the Senate of
the United States, the Journal shows that he adj
mitted by his votes the existence Of the constitu-
tiona power in its broadcast sense; but more par
ucular!y did he use his influence in favor Of the
improvement OF rivers, which the following ex-
tract from the Journal Of the Senate will prove;
An act to improve the navigation Of the Ohio
and Mississippi rivers" On ordering TO a third
reading, amended, May 10Th, 1924, General
Jackson voted in the affirmative. This bill nppro-
priated the sum OF $4,000 for the improvement
Of the Ohio and Mississippi rivers, and was APP
proved by President Monroe, This, think was
the very first appropriation that was made for the
improvement Of western river. General Jack
son, in his annual message Of December 7, 1890,
says:
THE practice Of defraying out Of the Treasury
Of the United States the expenses incurred by the
establishment and support Of hght-h buses, buoys,
and public piers, within the bays, inles, harbors,
and ports OF the United States, render the nari-
gaiion thereof safe and easy, coeye with the odop-
ton Of the Constitution, and has been continued
without interruption or dispute.n
In the succeeding paragraph he says
Lighthouses, be cons, buoys, public piers,
and the rsaorsi sand bars sarysrs, and other par
ual or temporary impediments in the nrvigabie
rivers and habors which we're embraced in the
revenue districts, from time TO time established by
law, were authorized, and the expense betrayed
in tho