Washington sentinel., 1854-05-04

which furnish any precedent for the present
bill and those examples will, in my opinion,
serve rather as warning, than as ON induce
ment to tread in the same path.
The first is the act of March Sd, 1919, grant
ing township of land to the Connecticut asy-
lum for the education of the deaf and dumb;
the second that of April 9th, 1926, making
similar grant of land to the Kentucky asylum,
for teaching the deaf and dumb-the hrst,
more than thirty years after the adoption
OF the Constitution, and the second more
than quarter Of century ago. These
acts were unimportant as to the amount ap-
propriated, and, SO far as / can acertain,
were passed on two grounds first, that the
object was charitable one; and, secondly, that
it was national. To say that it was charita-
table object, is only to say that it was an OBJ
ject of expenditure, proper for the competent
authority; but it no more tended to show that
it was proper object of expenditure by the
United States than is any other purely local
object appealing to the best sympathies of the
human heart in any of the States. And the
suggestion that school for the mental culture
of the deaf and dumb in Connecticut, or Ken
lucky, is national object, only shows how
loosely this expression has been used, when
the purpose was to procure appropriations by
Congress. 1t is not perceived how school Of
this character is otherwise national than is
any establishment of religious or moral in
struction. All the pursuits of industry, every
thing which promotes the material or intellec-
tual well-being of the race every ear of corn
or boil of cotton which grows is national in
the same sense, for each one of these things
goes to swell the aggregate Of national prosper
ity and happiness of the United States; but it
confounds all meaning of language to say that
lnnf 10
federal" so as to come within any ofthe classes
of appropriation for which Congress is author
| lied by the Constitution to legislate.
1t is a marked point of the history of the
Constitution that, when it was proposed to en-
power Congress to establish university the
propositionwas confined to the District intended
for the future seat of government Of the United
| States, and that even that proposed clause was
omitted in consideration of the exclusive pow
ers conferred on Congress to legislate for that
District Could more decisive indication of
the true construction and the spirit of the Con-
sttution, in regard to all matters of this nature,
have been given? 1t proves that such objects
were considered by the convention as apper.
tanning to local legislation only that they were
not comprehended, either expressly or by i'm
plication, in the grant of general power to Con-
gress, and that consequently they remained
with the several States.
The general result at which / have arrived
is the necessary consequence of those views
of the relative rights, powers, and duties of the
States and of the federal government, which l
have long entertained and often expressed,
and in reference to which my convictions do
but increase in force with time and experience.
l have thus discharged the unwelcome duty
of respectfully stating my objections to this
bill, with which / cheerfully submit the whole
subject to the wisdom of Congress.
FRANKLIN PIERCE.
! WAsuINcToN NM q 1894