The Yazoo Democrat., 1853-08-31
From The Washington Union.
TEac Democratic Party and Internal
HaumrOVeEneWfg.

Upon the assumption that the views OF Col-
onel Davis on the Pacific railroad are approved
BY President Pierce, (about which we DO not
undertake TO speak beyond d single point. some
OF our whig cotempofaries are deluaing them
selves with the hope that the policy OF the ad.
ninistTation IN regard 10 internal Improvements
is to be characterized by whig rather than demo
cratic principles. We have observed, too, thai
some of our democratic friends, especially in
Virginia, have hastily INDUCED IN similar ap
prehensions. 1t will be onr object in this az
ticle to remove these deusions and apprehen
sions from tie minds of whies and democrats
and further to show that the support Of the Pa
ciheEoad enterprise by governmental aid is ~
sirLcs consistency with sound democratic prin
cipes.
tits remarkable historical fact hat the most
prominent leaders in both parties, in laying
down their respective POSITIONS appeal 10 the
rules OF CONSUMING the constitution adopted By
Mr.. Aladisons celebrated comments Oh the Ken
tucky resolutions. In tie able speech of Mr.
/ Clay, delivered in 1918, on the general subject
OF lhiernal improvements. he announced his ac
qnlescence III those rules Of construction In on
reserved terms. Ia answer 20 the charge Of Alr.
Nelson, Of Virginia, that in his principles Of con-
structlCn he was not adhering To the republican
doctrines OF 1888, Mr. Clay said Il find tb,
| have used. without having been aware Of it,
almost the same identical language employed BY
Dir. Madison in that paper 1t viii be recol-
4
power under the constitution, unless such pow
er was expressly gnnted, or necessary aud prop
er 10 carry into elect some granted poNer. l
ndNe MOI sought 10 derive power from the cause
which authorizes Congress 10 appropriate money.
have been ccntcnted 10 show, that according
TO the doctrines of 1888 aud according 10 the
most rigid Interpretation which ANY one Will
pat upon the Instrument, il is expressly given
in one case, and fairly deducible in others"
+ 1t seems that although Mr. Nelson and MIR.
Clay started together, each relying upon The al
thorily of the Nrsinia resolutions, that one so
applied Nj. Aladisons principles Of consIpc-
/ ton as TO deny entirely the power to construct
works of internal improvement, whilst the other
found not only one express grant Of power, viz:
the power TO establish post roads, bat more than
one implied power, VIZ: the power TO regulate
commerce, and the war power. If ii Should be
asked how such contradictory conclusions could
/ be reached from one common principle Of con
lstruction, we may venture to answer that 1t was
The Legitimate result Of The different interpreta-
| tions which they gave to the language in which
the rule of construction was expressed they at
tached wholly different ideas to the words "nec-
essary and proper"-the one defining them TO
designate pabyer absolutely necessary and prop
er; III other words, one having ''a direct and
necessary relation TO some specified power" tie
other claiming for the agent who Is TO apply tie
implied power certain degree of discretion IN
enlaF2Ing or limiting the meaning Of The word $
necessary and proper, which would render them
/ synonymous with convenient and eihcacioUs.
/ The real difference between Mr.. Nelson and
/ Mr.. Clay was in the amount of discretion which
] they respectively allowed TO Congress in their
Interpretation of the constitutional words nee
essaTy and proper The one allowed little or
tno discretion, aud hence he was called strict
c0nSt-uctionist; the other allowed a liberal dis
cretion, and hence he was called kztitUdnGrian
| The one was the republican mode Of construc-
4i4aT
can or whig mode of construction. The same
/ distinction, with more or less variation, has
marked the political history of the two parties,
and exists at The present time.
/ When it devolyed upon General Jackson TO
determine whether he could constitutionGlly as
sent to the passage of The bill subscribing for
stock in the Maysvile road, he-inyestigated the
history Of this question with great care; and we
may now recur with profit TO the result of hs
labors, as announced in lis veto message. The
investigation Is commenced BY General Jackson
with this proposition:
The constitutional power Of the federal gov
eTnment to construct or promote works OF IN
ternai improvement presents itself in two points
of view the first, as bearing upon the sovereign
~ of the States within whose limits their exc
cution is contemplated, if jurisdiction Of the ter
ritory which they may occupy be claimed as nee
essary to their preservation and use."
General Jackson dispOses of this view of the
Although frequently and strenuously attempt
ed the power TO this extent has never been ex-
ercised by the government In single instance.
I 1t does not, In my opinion, possess it; and no
| BILL therefore. which admits it can receive my
official sanction
So far, then, as the strict Interpretation Of Mr.
Madisons principle of construction had been
lapplied from 1873 to 1880. the republican con-
lslruetion had been rigidly adhered to IN regard
/ to the power to construct works OF internal inn
provement within the States. That principle
of construction has been adhered to by the dem
/ ocratic party; nor has Col. Davis proposed TO
disturb it in his late speech III favor Of govern
ment aid to the Pacific railroad. He has not
proposed that the government shall construct
the road within either Of the States through
/ which it may be built, but, on the contrary, he
! has been explicit in earnestly disclaiming any
I power to- interfere with the sovereign rights or
i Jurisdiction of the States. AS to what kind Of
aid, if any, he may be willing that the govern
ment should afford to individual or State enter-
prize within the territorial limits OF the States
4 through which The road may pass, we viii SPEAK
i hereafter. What we now seek to do is to place
him and the administration (for on this point
lhe spoke as well for the President as hmself on
the old. -honored, irreyocabe republican
! principle so emphatically ANNOUNCED BY Gen.
Jackson.
But Gen. Jackson investigated the question Of
mower in a second vieW-ssas asserting the SIM
ple right to appro pirate money FROM the nation
al treasury in aid Of sHchworks, when underta-
ken BY State authority surEenderlng ne claim q
/ Jurisdiction.
In regard to the question q power involved
in this propositions General Jackson shows most
clearly by historical references, that the pfIncl-
pIe Of construction originally laid down BY Mr..
4 L. and violated