Daily evening star. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1852-1854, 1854-01-19

producers, and in most instances, are q greater
charge on the producers of the country trading
With them, than the gross value of the pro.
ducts they consume. Their wealth il amassed
BY exactions always made to the precise
Emit they will be endured,) from the agricul.
turist. Canals and railroads are constructed
to aid in the develoPm ent Of the elements of
prosperity and wealth in State, and towns
md cities are but their auxiliaries to the at.
tainment OF such end. A town or city is not
indispensable to the prosperity or greatness
OF any State Of the confederacy; and, indeed,
some of most philosophic statesmen have held
that e. large cities are sores on the body poll
tic. A profitable lesson for statesmen may be
fund in that line of the British poet, which
says, God made the country, and man the
town; !" and, indeed, in the entire poem from
which this line is quoted, the instance can.
not be cited in the history of unrestrained
commerce where any large city has grown up
and continued to flourish, when another was
founded having superior natural or artificial
facilities for Intercourse with the interior,
upon which both were dependent for support
Trade and commerce infexibly adhere to the
rule of self-interest. Their patriotism and
their religion rarely induce to violation Of
that "golden rule" They will adopt the
safest and cheapest channels to reach the
learest markets for what they wish to sell, and
he cheapest markets for what they wish to
buy. If, in reference to the natural advan.
lagos Of a town already located, or those
which may be obtained by artificial improve
ments, it is manifest that such town has been
located in wrong place; other towns, better
and more sagaciously located, will spring up
and supplant them, and be moro beneficial to
the people generally, and to the State. This
argument especially applies to all towns, and
to all trade and commerce carried on by rail-
roads. Those most interested in such trade
and commere, will create their own avenues.
and they may defy the temporary restraints
sought to be imposed upon them by town, q
:ity, or even State. If the power of the
Federal Government is not exercised to feiter
hem, they will always ultimately triumph
over all restrictions otherwise attempted to
be enforced against them.
With the federal Government, the sole mo-
tive and principle in making grants and alter
nate sections Of lands for the construction of
railroads through them as heretofore stated,
should BE tho enhancement Of the value and
increase of the sales Of the contiguous lands
This principle is not merely conceded, but it
advocated as legitimate and sound policy
by the federal Administration in the message
and documents of the opening of the present
session. 1t is q safe, and constitutional
ground. To allow any weight to the objec-
tons to certain grants because of apprehend-
Ell disturbance by the proposed road, with the
iaterests created by forced monopoly of trade
an commerce Of any town; in consequence Ct
the absence of such works, would not be in
harmony with the controlling principle above
advanced, nor consistent with any delegation
Of power to Congress existing in the federal
compact. The exercise Of such power would
be an assumption, and an interference with
the prerogative of the State to manage its
own domestic concerns. And the rightfulness
Of State legislation, by any means attempting
to dictate to the people what markets in OF
out of the State they may resort to, may well
be questioned. 1t may be conceded that the
federal Government can adopt measures to at
tain or secure commercial advantages for on,
own town, over a foreign commercial rival
and it does not weaken the argument against
such course with respect to home ports. By
the Constitution, the authority of Congress i!
expressly limited to the 'regulation'' of ''com
| merce," among" i. e. between the several
States, and it does not intend to commence
within and exclusively of any State. No
| only, it is clear, that no such power can b.
de1uced from the federal charter, but it de-
clares in express terms that 4" no preference
be given by any regulation Of commerce o.
revenue to The ports Of one State over those o.
another"
As a test of the principle contended for, il
| it il asked if South Carolina, or Pennsylvania
should declare by law, that no agriculturalis
of such State should send his cotton, or LII:
wheat elsewhere for sale, than the city o.
Charleston, or the city of Philadelphia; ant
impose penalties for disregard for such pro
hibit;on, or if Congress should pass n : por
bill'' like that passed by the British Parlia
ment against Boston, in 1872, would any bod,
respect, or obey such law, and would not b.
judiciary at once denounoe it as an invasio
of the federative compact? And who will
say that it is not as much a violation of the
principles of that charter to do such an act M.
directly, as if it was done directly? It i;
verse. 1t is an insult to the intelligence Of
the citizen, as we'll as an usurpation of his
rights, and an outrage upon the sovereignty
Of the State.
If the doctrines contended for are sound, il
follows that Congress should exclude all up.
plications for grants, except from the legis-
Latare of the State where the road is to run
should exclude all influences in favor OF
against grant, attempted to be exercised by
rival sections and towns; and that the only
safe and legitimate principle to keep in view,
is that of the United States as iaud proprie.
tor, in the enhancement of the price and pro-
motion of the sales Of the public lands by the
bull ling Of railroads through then.
TIE T.. s. OCEAN MAIL SrEALER SERVICE
We hear that Mr.. Churchwell is maturing a