Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-09-14

by the hope OF this subsequent bounty, than
you would by offering it in advance?
never, in any vote that ever gave to grant
bounty lands TO soldiers who served in any of
our wars, acted on the idea that the lands were
given under the clause authorizing Congress to
make all needful rules and regulations in re-
spect to the public domain. / always went
upon the ground that it was right and proper
to reward the faithful public services of our
military men under the war power, and have
always thought that The most appropriate way
in which that could be done would be by giving
them lands rather than money. To say moth
ing about other considerations, it would benefit
them more and incommode us less.
Mr.. CAMPBELL. If the honorable gentle
man will allow me, / should like to PROFOUND
a question to him at this time.
Mr.. BAYLY. Unquestionably will allow
the gentleman.
Mr.. CAMPBELL l wish to ask the gen.
teman whether, under the same war power
we cannot donate portion of the public lands
for the purpose of constructing railroads with
a view to the transportation Of troops and the
munitions of war?
Mr. BAYLY. shall come to that point d.
rectly. / have thus far only defended the votes
that / have given, in common with the Vir-
hCiS W SSuC w tic Dldteo
which they are the swamp lands which, in the
language OF the grant, are unfit for cultiva-
tion--in that we are guilty, think of no vio-
laton Of the trust with which we are charged
and, secondly, our vote to give lands to soldiers
who have served in our different wars. That
vote, repeat, was not given at all under the
power conferred on Congress to make all need
tul rules and regulations with respect to the
public territory. 1t was given under the war
power; and given in that mode only because
We thought it a better one than by granting
pensions.
The whole question in this matter is one of
truth and fidelity, AS l have already said
nobody disputes the power Of the general gov
eminent to dispose of and make all needful
rules and regulations with respect to the pub
lie lands but it must be done in good faith.
You must not, in administering this trust,
look one way and row another, if may be
excused for using common expression. You
are not, under the guise of making regula-
tons for the management of your property, to
aim at other and different objects. do not
dispute the right of this government to dis
pose of It's lands, if it is done in pursuance of
the trust which is limited by the Constitution.
The Constitution is one Of specific and linn
tied powers well defined 1t seems to me, in
this respect, almost incapable of misconstruc-
ton. You may appropriate your land just as
you may your money for any legitimate object
within the power of Congress. Our discretion
in this matter is limited by the character of
the trust; and that is limited by the character
of the Constitution. You may dispose of these
lands as you may dispose of your money for
constitutional objects, and for constitutional
objects alone. Why, sir, the clause authorizing
the Congress Of the United States to borrow
money is just as clear, is just as broad as the
power of the Constitution to dispose of the
land; yet will anybody here tell me that you can
borrow money to be used for any other pur.
poses than those which are pointed out by the
Constitution itself? You may borrow money
to raise an army; you may borrow money to
support navy; you may borrow money to
carry on the government; you may dispose of
the land for the same purpose; but will any
body tell me that you may borrow for purposes
which are either not authorized by the Consti-
tuition or which are prohibited by it? And in
this respect | draw no distinction; for hold
that it is precisely as unconstitutional to use
the means of the government for purposes not
authorized as it is for those which are posi-.
lively prohibited. Can you borrow money or
appropriate land for any subject over which
you have no control? Can you borrow money
to establish universities for the purposes OF
education? Can you borrow money to erect
lunatic asylums, or for the encouragement OF
agriculture or religious purposes? Why, no
body can point me TO the clause of the Consti-
tuition which shows that we have any authority,
that this government has any authority, over
any of these subjects. The moment you show
me that there is a subject over which this gov.
government has no authority to legislate, that
very moment you show me that there is one OF
the subjects TO promote for which you can
neither appropriate the land or the money Of
the United States.
The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. CAxPBEILl
asks me il, when have conceded the fact that
you may, under the war power, grant bounties
to men who have faithfully served in your
armies, and thus TO encourage enlistment in
any future difficulties, have not at the same
time conceded the right to make appropriations
for military roads under the same power ?
Why, presume that there is nobody in this
committee who will question the authority Of
the government 10 make military roads when
the purpose is bona tide to make military
road for military purposes. We do not deny
that, at least / do not; but what we do say il
that you have no authority, under the guist
and pretext Of making military road, to make
one for other and different purposes. Now
take this bill that is before the committee. NJ,
friend from Illinois (Mr. BIssEL) on yester
day read from the Secretary Of War a letter
saying that this particular road would be ar
important one as a military road. Well, now
Mr.. Chairman, the simple test is this, which
every man can apply for himself and abou
which there can be no mistake. Is there an,
man in this committee voting for this law with
a view Of really making a road in the Territor,
Of Minnesota for military purposes Is tha
the principal object aimed at? And is tn,
benefit which it is to bring to the country
through which it runs to be incidental only
! Why, Mr.. Chairman, j should doubt the cando
though j am not in the habit Of doing So,
should doubt the candor Of the member who
would get up here, and tell me that his obiec
in voting for any Of these bills is with view
TO our defense in time Of war, and that he i
acting under the war power. 1t is a subterfuge
it is a perversion Of power. If the construc
ton which the Secretary Of war seems to hav
put, on more than one occasion, on this powe
| be the true one, then there is no limit TO tn
authority Of this government, for there j
nothing which you can do that / know O
| which will add AN iota To the nrosnor;tv of tb,