Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1853-11-26
:. INTERNAL NORTHUMBERLAND AND HAIR
B0Rs-THE POWER OF CONGRESS-"

and especially the Z" Improvement of Rivers and
Harbors." Without any detailed reference to the
reasoning of the Jaon, it will be sufficient for our
purpose to state its general proposition which is,
that, as general rule, River and Harbor Improve
Inents belong appropriately to the several States
under the provision of the Constitution which
gives to States, under certain conditions and for
certain purposes, a right to levy duties on imports
and exports
If the present conductors of the Union had been
called on to discuss this debatabe question often
and as long as their venerable predecessor from the
land of distractions, they would have had little re-
lish for returning to it. But they have thought
proper do so, and as their remarks have the calm
ness and apparent good faith which become the
columns of an official journal, it is somewhat in
cpmbent on US, as an ancient antagonist Of such
hcrcsies, to bestow on the Unions article brief
notice. If in doing this, find it convenient from
want Of time, to quote from our own files, we must
seek warrant for it in the remark of SENECA,
i" that never is that too often said which is never
sufficiently learned"
Letus clear up ideas by showing what the pro-
vision Of the Constitution is which is referred to
and relied on by the Union. 1t is the second
clause Of the tenth section of the first article and
is as follows:
mo State shall, without the consent of the
Congress, lay any imposts 1or duties on imports or
exports, except what may be absolutely necessary
for executing its inspection laws and the nett pro-
ducc OF all duties and imposts laid by any State
on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the
Treasury of the United States; and all such laws
shall be subject to the revision and control of the
Congress. No State shall, without the consent of
Congress, lay any duty on tonnage" &c.
There is, also, in the seventh clause of the
ninth section of the first article the following posi-
tive inhibition:
= No money shall be drawn from the Treasury
but IN consequence OF appropriations made BY law"
BY the first of these provisions all moneys col
leced must be paid into the Treasury Of the United
States, from which, BY the second they cannot be
drawn but by an appropriation made BY law.
Now, it seems clear to us that if these works of
River and Harbor Improvement be managed by the
States, such management is under the Constitution
a management under the revision and control of
Congress- and by consequence the consent of Con- |
gress therefore, in fact, management of Congress,
and By virtue of the consent and power of Con-
grcss This conclusion is unavoidable and the
article Of the Union is, to our minds q clear con-
cession Of the power of Congress to make the i'm
Eroyemcnts. The States may be used by Congress
as agents in the execution Of the duty.
With this brief reference to the language and in
terpreation Of the constitutional provision, we will
row, we intimated we should do, recur to our
files for some views formerly advanced on the sub
al, Il e -, A.
lS4S, we entered somewhat at length on this topic
reviewing the different acts of Congress which had
given consent to State legislation under this pro-
vision Of the Constitution. We beg to offer to our
contemporary the following quotation from that
editorial:
We refer to the peculiar legislation which gave
the consent of Congress to certain acts Of State e
gislaon in reference to tonnage duties for specific
purposes An examination into this legislation can
create other impression than that the consent of
Congress i given with reluctance, generally for
very short periods, renewed as required at subse-
quent sessions and that the objects Of the legsla.
ton were frequently, and indeed chiefly, as far as
the greater number of those acts is concerned, to
support health officers for ports, and for sick and
disabled scamen The legislation is evidently
temporary substitute (evcn in these specified cases)
until Congress could digest and adopt its own course
The later laws on these subjects also show that the
State agents employed had to render their accounts
Of expenditures to the United States Treasury De
partment. After 1922 we do not perceive any more
Of this legislation If there be any more it has
capped our investigation, and the laws these sub
jccts for years before 1922 are mere renewals (by
Congress) Of consent previously given. But be
that as it may, these laws invariably show that the
consent Of Congress had to be invoked and granted
IN all cases, and Of consequence the plan and object
had TO be such az Congress should approve, as the
consent Of Congress lad to be given to the law Of
the State in which the plan and object were expos
ed. This consent is also frequently accompanied
with statement in the United States law of the
object, and always with special reference to the State
law that is approved"
"Sccondly, the legislation also shows that it was
not merely temporary but very limited kind
Of legislation sort Of substitute, until Congress
could act more directly, in which State authorities
wcrc'made agents Of Congress, and obliged, as
consent was renewed to render accounts Of expendi
lures to the United States Treasury Department.
1t may also not be out Of place to remark that no
body Of United States Engineers existed till (aftcr
1902"
Gone leading principle unequivocally and with
out exception governs the entire legislation on this
~ Ia