Washington sentinel., 1854-05-06

4
subsequent bounty than you would by offering
| il in advance.
| never, in any vote that / ever gave to grant
bounty lands to soldiers who had served in any
| of our wars, acted on the idea that the lands
were given under the clause authorizing Con-
gress to make all needful rules and regulations
in respect 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 l
| 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
nothing about other considerations, 1T would
| benefit them more, and incommode us less.
i Mr.. CAMPBELL. If the honorable gentle
man will allow me, should like to PROFOUND
question to him at this time.
Mr. BAYLY. Unquestionably / will allow
the gentleman.
Mr. CAMPBELL. / wish to ask the gentle
man whether, under that 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 di-
rectly. have thus far only defended the votes
that have given, in common with the Virginia
| delegation, first to cede to the States in which
/
| guage of the grant, are unfit for cultivation.
In that we were guilty, think, of no violation
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 needful
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 better one than by granting pen
sions.
The whole question in this matter is one of
truth and fidelity. As have already said, no
} body disputes the power of the general govern
ment to dispose of and make all needful rules
and regulations with respect to the public
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 on are not,
under the guise of making regulations for the
management of your property, to aim at other
| and different objects. / do not dispute the
right this government to dispose of its lands,
| if it is done in pursuance of the trust which is
limited by the Constitution.
The Constitution is one of specific and limit
ed powers well defined. 1t seems to me,in this
respect, almost incapable of misconstruction.
You may appropriate your land just as you
|
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
f power Of the Constitution to dispose of the
land yet will anybody here tell me that you
7 can borrow money to be used for any other
purposes than those which are pointed out by
the Constitution itself. You may borrow money
J 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 purposes; 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 edu
cation? Can you borrow money to erect luna
tic asylums, or for the encouragement of agr
culture, or religious purposes? Why, nobody
can point me to the clause of the Constitution
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 government
I 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.. CAMPBELL
! asks me if, when have conceded the fact that
c you may under the war power grant bounties
. to men who have faithfully served in your ar
7 mics, and thus to encourage enlistments in
] any future difficulties, have not at the same
time conceded the right to make appropriations
a for military roads under the same power ?
e Why, / presume that there is nobody in this
! committee who will question the authority OF
E the government to make military roads when
f the purpose is bona tide to make military
e road for military purposes. We do not deny
that, at least do not; but what we do say is
4 that you have authority, under the guise
J and pretext of making military road, to make
5 one for other and different purposes. Now
. take this bill that is before the committee. Ny
6 friend from Illinois Mr.. BIssELLl yester-
i day had read from the Secretary of War let
ter, saying that this particular road would be
, an important one as military road. Well,
now, Mr.. Chairman, the simple test Is this,
, and which every man can apply for himself,
about which there can be no mistake: Is there
any man in this committee voting for this law
with view of really making a road in the
Territory of Minnesota for military purposes ?
Is that the principal object aimed at; and is
the benefit which it is to bring to the country
through which it runs to be incidental only ?
Why, Mr. Chairman, / should doubt the can
dor-though am not in the habit of doing
SOL should doubt the candor of the member
whe would get up here and tell me that his
object in voting for any of these bills is with
view to our defence in time Of war, and that
he is acting under the war power. 1t is sub
terfuge. 1t is perversion of power. If the
construction which the Secretary of War
seems to have put, on more than one occa-
sion, on this power be the true one, then there
is no limit to the authority of this government
for there is nothing which you can do, that
know of, which will add an iota to the pros.
perity of the country, that will not also increase
its military strength. We all know that the
military force of the nation depends, to large
extent, upon its prosperity and the facility Of
transit; and if the theory be true that because
a road viii add to our strength or in some
oI,1Ia a.