The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-08-03

We had The pleasure of meeting with the Hon. ]. II
Ralson. of California, on yesterday. His numerous
friends will be gra6ed 10 learn that be is in good
health.
Richmond Enquirer and the Pacific Railroad
The Richmond Enquirer has been regarded so long,
par excellence, the exponent OF the Virginia school OF
strict consiruconis,s that there is something OF oracu-
lar importance due to lis opinions constitutional ques
tons Freely conrcdng to that journal this high dis
tncon, and readily acknowledging the valuable services
which has rendered in maintaining the ascendency OF
true republican principles in the federal government. we
feel unaffected regret ndng ourselves at issue with II
IN the application of Of the most important OF those
principles. We should have for much more regret
il we supposed that there existed between us any sub
stanlia difference 10 the principle itself but such is
not understanding OF the issue which the Enquirer
makes with us II will be recoected that in anticipa
ton Of such issue, took OCCASION al the tbreshod
to auds to the danger Of making an erroneous appca
ton of sound rule of constitutional construction. This
ia precisely the error into which the Enquirer TO
to have fallen.
We agree with the Enquirer that II was unnecessary
for that journal TO announce its hostility 10 The appTo
priaton of federal funds for purposes Of internal i'm
provementit equally unnecessary for us to make
such an announcement; but, with all due Difference
suggest that il necessary for both OF us 10 avoid The
assumption that The proposed government aid 10 the Pa
ci6c road is violation of the principle which we
both stand opposed to appropriations for internal i'm
provemen,s |, occurs that ii would have shown
no more than reasonable respect Tor the opinions of
eminent statesmen OF the Virginia strict, construction
school if The Enquirer had pointed out the violation of the
II IN ha
involved in the opinions OF those statesmen. We would
be understood ntmating that because the ediler
Of the Charleston Mercury and Col Davis and even Mr.
Calhoun had arrived the conclusion that an approp-
alton OF federal funds construct road through the
federal territory compatible with "the principles for
which Virginia has commended snce the day OF the elder
Adams, therefore the Enquirer should surrender its in
dependence of thought and lis right TO reason; but We
simply that knowledge that such statesmen had
arrived such conclusion might very well have JUS
titled The Enquirer in showing, if il could be shown,
that there was error in their conclusions, instead OF
sumiDg lis existence.
But we are persuaded that by some lille in
alyzing the positions of the Enquirer satisfy our
esteemed contemporary that he has been hasty in
repudiang The power which we have claimed and that
the only difference between us is in the application Of
principle 10 which we both agree We feel authorized
to assume iha, the Enquirer will assen, TO the sound
Of this principle Congress exercise those
only which expressly granted the constitution,
which are necessary and proper for carrying into
ton express grant Of power The power TO protect
Stale agains, invasion is distinctly conferred in the obi
CATION which the federal government expressly assumes
TO extend s,ch protection to every State. California
h.. IN ohl Her
senator's and representatives made the demand the last
session of Congress with imporlunae earnes,ness She
comes with The bond in her hand she points to her
posed condition, her inability TO defend herself against
invasion, the strong temptation TO aggression furnished
by her boundess treasures OF gold The government
acknowledges The obligation. and turns TO the coss,u
ton 10 asceIta the character of protection which is
there authorized, and TO the actual condition OF Calfor
MA TO ascertain what character OF protection will be e.
fecual Upon this inves cation, take the ground
that il no other species OF protection will be efeciua but
road for the speedy transportation OF men and NUM-
tons of war; the power to make such road is necessary
and proper" and that clearly within the Virginia
school OF strict construction, Does the Enquirer
trover this conclusion We infer not for the editor
says We lay down The general proposition tina, any
such work be consutionally constructed by
the general government for military purpose, unless
the Immediate urgencies OF actual require lis use
for the transportation OF troops before individual State
enterprise have time to consruc, IT," We understand
This TO conoede the question. The power may be exer-
ci.ed when the urgency Of actual demands It's
else That much is clearly conceded When State Ia
inv AIDED, then Congress appropriate money 10 build
railroad to transport troops to rspel the invaders !
Does the Enquirer mean that there is power in the
constitution IN time OF tina, is no, there in time of
peace Or does il mean TO be understood tina, the
eec,iy under which the power may be exercised can
never arise until there is actual war Does ii not
that upon sach a construction must wait until there
ia actual before Congress can make appropriations
for forfcat '-for the power 10 build ports. maya
znes and arsenas s derived from express grant, but
constitutional because necessary for the defence.
and to po,ec, the States against INVASION IL il not ap
parent that such construction fohiis the government
from preparing eHcctually for in time OF peace
But upon what prnciple does The Enquirer stand
when il comedies that the power may be exercised
under the urgency OF actual war Most unqueson.
ably upon the principle that the power is then ne-
cessary and proper" or. the Enquirer would proba
big say. absolutely necessary and proper" We adj
NIT that case OF necessity then exists but we say
further that the necessity also exists before The actual
occurrence Of war; II it il clearly shown that no other
eecua mode Of protection against the caames OF wal
can be resorted to- II IL upon this view of the necessity